Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Stephen J. KATZ, (admitted as Stephen Joshua Katz), an attorney and counselor-at-law. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, Stephen J. Katz, Respondent.
Respondent Stephen J. Katz was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on October 24, 2001. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent has maintained his principal place of business within the First Judicial Department.
On July 7, 2008, respondent pleaded guilty in Supreme Court, New York County, to one count of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 110/220.16), a class C felony, and one count of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06), a class D felony, in full satisfaction of two separate indictments. Respondent admitted that on May 18, 2007, he knowingly and unlawfully possessed the hallucinogenic “MDMA,” a controlled substance, with the intent to sell it, and that on June 1, 2007, he knowingly and unlawfully attempted to possess at least one gram of “MDMA” and “MA,” another hallucinogen, with the intent to sell it. On September 2, 2008, respondent was sentenced to two concurrent prison terms of one year.
The Departmental Disciplinary Committee now moves for an order, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), striking respondent's name from the roll of attorneys on the ground that he was automatically disbarred as of the date of his conviction of a felony, as defined by Judiciary Law § 90(4)(e) (see Matter of Berman, 53 A.D.3d 11, 859 N.Y.S.2d 423 [2008]; Matter of Cherry, 51 A.D.3d 119, 854 N.Y.S.2d 8 [2008] ). For the purposes of automatic disbarment, conviction occurs at the time of plea or verdict (see Matter of Sheinbaum, 47 A.D.3d 49, 845 N.Y.S.2d 264 [2007]; Matter of Ramirez, 7 A.D.3d 52, 775 N.Y.S.2d 133 [2004] ), and respondent's conviction of two drug-related felonies constitutes grounds for automatic disbarment (see Matter of Weinstat, 128 A.D.2d 90, 515 N.Y.S.2d 439 [1987]; Matter of Hill, 61 A.D.2d 185, 402 N.Y.S.2d 1 [1978] ).
Accordingly, the Committee's motion should be granted, and respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective nunc pro tunc to July 7, 2008, the date of entry of his guilty plea.
Respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective nunc pro tunc to July 7, 2008.
PER CURIAM.
All concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 19, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)