to the administration of justice, or to the public
interest.
Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that "must be so
clear as to leave no substantial doubt." In re Discipline of Drakulich, 111
Nev. 1556, 1567, 908 P.2d 709, 715 (1995) (internal quotations omitted).
Having reviewed the record, we conclude that Salas failed to
set forth clear and convincing evidence that he is competent to resume the
practice of law. Specifically, Salas was diagnosed by a doctor with severe
depression and received a disability rating for the purpose of obtaining
workers' compensation benefits. Salas indicated that the depression was
brought on by the stress from his job as a public defender in Los Angeles
County. While subject to periodic reevaluation over the course of at least
10 years, Salas' diagnosis of depression remained, and he continued to
collect workers' compensation benefits. However, aside from his testimony
at the reinstatement hearing, Salas did not produce any documentation or
medical opinion that he no longer suffers from depression, is no longer
disabled by depression, and that he is able to handle the stressors
associated with the practice of law again. Accordingly, we approve the
recommendation of the hearing panel and deny Salas' petition for
reinstatement.' Any petition for reinstatement filed by Salas within one
'In our October 23, 2012, Order of Suspension in Docket No. 58280,
we imposed a condition that prior to petitioning for reinstatement, Salas
shall provide the State Bar with proof that he has fulfilled all of the
requirements of his five-year California probation. The main requirement
of the probation was that Salas pay restitution in the amount of $100,000.
Our intent behind the imposition of this petition was that Salas could
petition for reinstatement after the expiration of his three-year
suspension, but before the expiration of his five-year probationary period,
as long as he could demonstrate either that he has paid the ordered
continued on next page . . .
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1917k e
year of the date of this order will not be deemed successive by this court.
See SCR 116(6).
It is so ORDERED-1
Gibbons
J.
Pickering
A-ci.A,1 QC.
Parraguirre Douglas
. . continued
restitution in full, or that he is current with his court-mandated
payments. Thus any future petition for reinstatement filed by Salas
should include documentation regarding the current state of his
restitution payments and his payment history.
2 Based on our conclusion, we did not consider the remaining
arguments in Salas' opening brief.
This is our final disposition of this matter. Any new proceedings
concerning Salas shall be docketed under a new docket number.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e
cc: Jeffrey R. Albregts, Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada
David Clark, Bar Counsel
Richard J. Salas
Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
4
(0) 1947A e