IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF No. 69548
JOSLYN J. LAMADRID, BAR NO. 9093.
FILED
MAR 2 5 2016
TRAD K. LINDEMAN
ERK PREME.0 0YR1
BY
Hieriwaiscirra.
ORDER APPROVING CONDITIONAL GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT
This is an automatic review of a Southern Nevada
Disciplinary Board hearing panel's recommendation that this court
approve, pursuant to SCR 113, a conditional guilty plea agreement in
exchange for a stated form of discipline for attorney Joslyn LaMadrid.
Under the agreement, LaMadrid admitted to violations of RPC 1.1
(competence), RPC 1.3 (diligence), RPC 1.4 (communication), RPC 3.2
(expediting litigation), RPC 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal); RPC 4.1
(truthfulness in statements to others), RPC 5.5 (unauthorized practice of
law), RPC 8.1 (bar admission and disciplinary matters), and RPC 8.4
(misconduct) and single violations of RPC 1.5 (fees), RPC 1.15 (safekeeping
property), RPC 5.3 (responsibilities regarding nonlawyer assistants), RPC
5.4 (professional independence of a lawyer), and RPC 7.1 (communications
concerning a lawyer's services).
The agreement provides for an 18-month suspension to be
served concurrently with the 1-year suspension previously imposed by this
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A Apip
court in Docket No. 61137. The concurrent suspensions will not commence
until LaMadrid resolves her CLE suspension imposed in Docket No.
58961. Additionally, the agreement requires that LaMadrid pay the costs
of the disciplinary proceedings, excluding bar counsel and staff salaries,
and that she demonstrate her continued sobriety during the pendency of
her suspension before being reinstated to the practice of law.
Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the guilty
plea agreement should be approved. See SCR 113(1). Considering the
duties violated, LaMadrid's mental state (knowledge but not intent), the
potential or actual injury caused by her misconduct, and the aggravating
and mitigating circumstances, we conclude that the 18-month concurrent
suspension is sufficient to serve the purpose of attorney discipline. See In
re Lerner, 124 Nev. 1232, 1246, 197 P.3d 1067, 1077 (2008) (setting forth
factors to be considered); State Bar of Nev. v. Claiborne, 104 Nev. 115, 213,
756 P.2d 464, 527-28 (1988) (explaining purpose of attorney discipline); see
also ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, Compendium of
Professional Responsibility Rules and Standards Standard 4.41 (2015). In
particular, LaMadrid's efforts to gain her sobriety and to maintain that
sobriety over a three-year period convince us that the agreed-upon
discipline provides sufficient additional time to ensure that she is
rehabilitated and can remain clean and sober while managing the stress of
practicing law.
We hereby impose an 18-month suspension to be served
concurrently with the 1-year suspension imposed in Docket No. 61137.
The concurrent disciplinary suspensions shall not commence until
LaMadrid resolves her administrative suspension. Additionally,
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
IA 1947A e
LaMadrid shall pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings, excluding
bar counsel and staff salaries, within 90 days of receipt of the State Bar's
bill of costs. See SCR 120. The State Bar shall comply with SCR 121.1.
It is so ORDERED.
Parraguirre
Hardesty
Cherry
SAITTA, J. and PICKERING, JJ., dissenting:
We dissent.
Saitta
&24JAA f
Pickering
cc: Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
Joslyn J. LaMadrid
C. Stanley Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada
Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada
Perry Thompson, Admissions Officer, United States Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e