2014 WI 2
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2013AP2126-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against
Steven T. Berman, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Steven T. Berman,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST BERMAN
OPINION FILED: January 3, 2014
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2014 WI 2
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2013AP2126-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Steven T. Berman, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
JAN 3, 2014
v.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
Steven T. Berman,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a stipulation filed pursuant
to SCR 22.121 by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and
1
SCR 22.12 states as follows: Stipulation.
(1) The director may file with the complaint a
stipulation of the director and the respondent to the
facts, conclusions of law regarding misconduct, and
discipline to be imposed. The supreme court may
consider the complaint and stipulation without the
appointment of a referee.
No. 2013AP2126-D
Attorney Steven T. Berman. In the stipulation, Attorney Berman
agrees that by engaging in conduct leading to a criminal
conviction for the felony offense of conspiracy to commit
securities fraud, he violated the supreme court rules. He also
agrees that a two-year suspension of his license to practice law
in Wisconsin is an appropriate level of discipline for his
misconduct. There is no request in this matter for a
restitution award, nor is there a request for the imposition of
costs against Attorney Berman.
¶2 Following careful review of the matter, we agree that
a two-year suspension of Attorney Berman's license to practice
law is a proper sanction. Since this matter is being resolved
without the appointment of a referee, we do not impose any costs
on Attorney Berman.
¶3 Attorney Berman was admitted to the practice of law in
Wisconsin in 1987. His law license was summarily suspended,
upon the motion of the OLR, on August 9, 2013. His license
(2) If the supreme court approves a stipulation,
it shall adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of
law and impose the stipulated discipline.
(3) If the supreme court rejects the
stipulation, a referee shall be appointed and the
matter shall proceed as a complaint filed without a
stipulation.
(4) A stipulation rejected by the supreme court
has no evidentiary value and is without prejudice to
the respondent's defense of the proceeding or the
prosecution of the complaint.
2
No. 2013AP2126-D
remains suspended. Attorney Berman has not previously been the
subject of professional discipline.
¶4 The stipulation states that on April 12, 2013,
Attorney Berman appeared before the Honorable Nathaniel M.
Gorton in United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts in the matter of United States v. Steven Berman,
CR No. 11-10415-NMG, and entered a guilty plea to the felony
offense of Conspiracy to Commit Securities Fraud, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1348, 1349, and 2. The court adjudged Attorney
Berman guilty of Conspiracy to Commit Securities Fraud. On July
16, 2013, Attorney Berman was sentenced to a prison term of 18
months in federal prison, plus a term of one year of supervised
release upon his release from imprisonment.
¶5 On September 25, 2013, the OLR filed a complaint
alleging that by engaging in conduct leading to his conviction
for the felony offense of Conspiracy to Commit Securities Fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1348, 1349, and 2, Attorney Berman
violated SCR 20:8.4(b).2
¶6 On October 15, 2013, the parties entered into a
stipulation whereby Attorney Berman agreed that his conduct
violated SCR 20:8.4(b). Attorney Berman also agreed that it
would be appropriate for this court to impose the level of
2
SCR 20:8.4(b) states it is professional misconduct for a
lawyer to "commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the
lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in
other respects; . . . ."
3
No. 2013AP2126-D
discipline sought by the OLR director, namely, a two-year
suspension of his license to practice law in Wisconsin.
¶7 Attorney Berman represents that he fully understands
the misconduct allegation and the ramifications should this
court impose the stipulated level of discipline. He also states
that he fully understands his right to contest the matter and
his right to consult with counsel. He states his entry into the
stipulation is made knowingly and voluntarily. He also states
that he is aware that imposition of a two-year suspension of his
law license would result in his license remaining suspended
until and unless he successfully petitions for reinstatement
pursuant to the procedures set forth in SCRs 22.29-22.33.
¶8 Having carefully considered this matter, we approve
the stipulation and adopt the stipulated facts and legal
conclusion of professional misconduct. We also agree that,
given the serious nature of the misconduct, a two-year
suspension of Attorney Berman's license to practice law is
appropriate. We note that we have previously imposed similar
suspensions in cases where attorneys have been convicted in
federal court of "white collar" crimes. See, e.g., In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Stern, 2013 WI 46, 347
Wis. 2d 552, 830 N.W.2d 674; In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Henningsen, 2004 WI 119, 275 Wis. 2d 285, 685
N.W.2d 523.
¶9 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Steven T. Berman to
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for two years, effective
the date of this order.
4
No. 2013AP2126-D
¶10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Steven T. Berman shall
continue compliance with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning
the duties of a person whose license to practice law in
Wisconsin has been suspended.
5
No. 2013AP2126-D
1