From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Caparros

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 6, 1988
142 A.D.2d 122 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

December 6, 1988

Rosemary F. Palladino of counsel (Michael A. Gentile, attorney), for petitioner.

Ronald L. Kuby for respondent.


Respondent J. Alexis Caparros was admitted to the practice of law under the name Jenaro Alexis Caparros by the First Department on July 8, 1985. Respondent was convicted, based upon a guilty plea of the crime of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and was sentenced on June 27, 1988, to a term of three years' imprisonment. Execution of sentence was suspended and respondent placed on probation for a period of three years on condition that he undergo psychiatric treatment.

Petitioner has moved for an order: determining that the crime of which respondent has been convicted is a "serious crime" within the meaning of Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (d); suspending him from the practice of law pending a final order of discipline; and directing him to show cause within 30 days why a final order of censure, suspension or disbarment should not be entered against him. In answer to the petition, respondent accepts the determination that a Federal felony offense constitutes a "serious crime" within the meaning of New York's Judiciary Law. Respondent, who has voluntarily ceased practicing law, also accepts petitioner's recommendation that he be suspended, but urges that the term of suspension be made concurrent with his term of probation. Petitioner, however, argues that respondent's probationary term should be considered the minimum period for respondent's suspension, given this court's ruling that an attorney may not practice law while serving on probation for commission of a crime (Matter of Langberg, 118 A.D.2d 323 [1st Dept 1986]; Matter of Safran, 107 A.D.2d 238 [1st Dept 1985]).

Inasmuch as respondent has been convicted of a felony under the laws of the United States, which is "a serious crime" under section 90 (4) (d) of the Judiciary Law and the rules of this court ( 22 NYCRR 603.12 [b]), immediate suspension pending a final order of discipline is warranted. Petitioner's motion is therefore granted, respondent suspended from the practice of law herewith, and respondent ordered to show cause within 30 days of entry of this court's order of suspension, why a final order of suspension, censure or removal should not be entered against him.

MURPHY, P.J., ROSS, ASCH, KASSAL and ROSENBERGER, JJ., concur.

Respondent is directed to show cause why a final order of suspension, censure or removal from office should not be made and, pending final determination of the petition, respondent is suspended from practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately and until the further order of this court.


Summaries of

Matter of Caparros

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 6, 1988
142 A.D.2d 122 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Matter of Caparros

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of J. ALEXIS CAPARROS (Admitted as JENARO ALEXIS CAPARROS)…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 6, 1988

Citations

142 A.D.2d 122 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
534 N.Y.S.2d 972

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Klein

(Judiciary Law § 90 [d]; 22 NYCRR 603.12 [b]). As noted, wire fraud is a felony under the United States Code,…

Departmental Disciplinary Comm. for the First Judicial Dep't v. Newkirk (In re Newkirk)

The crime which respondent was convicted of is a "serious crime" within the meaning of Judiciary Law §…