IN RE: COMMITTEE ON BAR ADMISSIONS CFN-867377 (2020)

BAR ADMISSIONS PROCEEDING

After reviewing the evidence and considering the law, we conclude petitioner is immediately eligible to be conditionally admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana, subject to the following conditions:

1. Petitioner shall continue to comply with the terms of the recovery agreement he signed with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (“JLAP”) on February 3, 2020.

2. The period of this conditional admission shall coincide with the period of petitioner's JLAP agreement. However, petitioner's conditional admission status shall not be terminated until this court so orders.

3. Petitioner shall authorize the Executive Director of JLAP to report any violations of the JLAP agreement to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”). 4. Upon the expiration of the term of petitioner's JLAP agreement, the Executive Director of JLAP shall forward to the ODC (a) a final report of petitioner's progress and participation in JLAP, and (b) a recommendation regarding the need for petitioner's continued participation in JLAP.

5. Following receipt of the report from JLAP, the ODC shall file a report in this court in which it shall recommend whether the conditional admission shall be allowed to terminate or shall be extended.

6. Petitioner shall cooperate with JLAP and the ODC, and shall comply with any and all requirements imposed upon him by JLAP and the ODC.

Should petitioner fail to make a good faith effort to satisfy these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.

CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.

As I have previously written, the Louisiana Constitution vests this Court with original jurisdiction in all “disciplinary proceedings against a member of the bar.” La. Const. art. V, § 5(B). Notwithstanding the fact that petitioner and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel have submitted this matter as a joint petition, I believe – as our Constitution provides – that the seven justices may determine the appropriate result under that exclusive grant of jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re: Hardee, 18-1555 (La. 11/14/18), 259 So. 3d 329 (Crichton, J., dissents from consent discipline petition as unduly harsh); In re: Committee on Bar Admissions CFN-1152, 17-706 (La. 6/5/17), 220 So. 3d 1293 (Crichton, J., would reject joint petition for conditional admission and admit without conditions). Upon examination of this record, as well as petitioner's demonstrated growth and the unique circumstances presented herein, I would admit this petitioner without the conditions imposed by the majority, and therefore submit this concurrence in part and dissent in part from the per curiam.

PER CURIAM

Crichton, J., concurs in part and dissents in part and assigns reasons.