2013 WI 36
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2013AP314-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Joseph M. Engl, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Joseph M. Engl,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ENGL
OPINION FILED: April 30, 2013
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2013 WI 36
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2013AP314-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Joseph M. Engl, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
APR 30, 2013
v.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
Joseph M. Engl,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
revoked.
¶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
No. 2013AP314-D
Attorney Joseph M. Engl. In the stipulation, Attorney Engl
agrees that he committed two acts of professional misconduct,
including engaging in crimes that reflect adversely on his
honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other
respects. He also agrees that the revocation of his license to
practice law in Wisconsin is a proper level of discipline for
his misconduct. There is no request in this matter for a
restitution award nor is there a request in the stipulation for
the imposition of costs against Attorney Engl.
¶2 After fully reviewing the matter, we approve the
stipulation and revoke Attorney Engl's license to practice law
in this state. The crimes and professional misconduct committed
by Attorney Engl are disturbing and, given the prior discipline
he received for similar conduct, support his removal from the
practice of law. Because this matter is being resolved without
the appointment of a referee, we do not impose any costs on
Attorney Engl.
consider the complaint and stipulation without the
appointment of a referee.
(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. 2013AP314-D
¶3 Attorney Engl was admitted to the practice of law in
Wisconsin in May 2002. He previously maintained a law practice
in Manitowoc. The most recent address he provided to the State
Bar was in Sheboygan.
¶4 Attorney Engl has been the subject of public
discipline on one prior occasion. In 2005 this court accepted
an SCR 22.12 stipulation that Attorney Engl reached with the OLR
and publicly reprimanded him. In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Engl, 2005 WI 102, 283 Wis. 2d 140, 698 N.W.2d 821. The
misconduct at issue in that proceeding was Attorney Engl's
conviction for one count of using a computer to facilitate a
child sex crime. Specifically, while working at a law firm,
Attorney Engl used his computer to enter an Internet chat room
and to communicate his interest in having sexual intercourse
with an individual he believed to be a 14-year-old girl, but who
was actually a police detective posing as a teenage girl. When
Attorney Engl subsequently went to the location where he had
arranged to meet the girl, he was arrested by the police.
¶5 As in the prior disciplinary proceeding, in the
current matter Attorney Engl has entered into a stipulation with
the OLR pursuant to SCR 22.12. In the stipulation, Attorney
Engl agrees that the factual allegations in the OLR's complaint
are accurate and that he committed the professional misconduct
charged in that complaint. He further agrees with the OLR's
request that the appropriate discipline for his misconduct is
the revocation of his license to practice law in Wisconsin.
3
No. 2013AP314-D
¶6 The stipulation states that Attorney Engl fully
understands the nature of the misconduct allegations against
him, his right to contest those allegations, and the
ramifications that would follow from this court's imposition of
the stipulated level of discipline. It also states that
Attorney Engl understands his right to consult with counsel.
Finally, in the stipulation Attorney Engl verifies that he is
entering the stipulation knowingly and voluntarily and that his
entry into the stipulation represents his decision not to
contest this matter.
¶7 The complaint to which Attorney Engl stipulated
addresses two matters. The first matter is similar to the
conduct that resulted in the 2005 public reprimand. According
to the criminal complaint filed against him, Attorney Engl
engaged in e-mail communication with a female, who explicitly
informed him that she was 15 years old. Their communications
included discussions about meeting in person for the purpose of
having sexual intercourse. On November 19, 2011, Attorney Engl
drove to the girl's workplace and picked her up. Attorney Engl
engaged in sexual contact with the girl and had her perform oral
sex on him.
¶8 In March 2012 the State charged Attorney Engl with six
felonies. State v. Engl, Manitowoc County Case No. 2012CF108.
Ultimately, in October 2012, Attorney Engl pled no contest to
two felonies: child enticement-sexual contact and sexual
assault of a child under 16 years of age. The remaining four
felony charges were dismissed upon the prosecutor's motion and
4
No. 2013AP314-D
read in for sentencing purposes. The circuit court accepted
Attorney Engl's pleas. The court sentenced him on the child
enticement-sexual contact count to three years of initial
confinement and three years of extended supervision. On the
sexual assault of a child count, the circuit court imposed and
stayed a sentence of an additional four years of initial
confinement and five years of extended supervision and placed
Attorney Engl on probation for a period of six years, which was
to run consecutive to the six-year sentence imposed on the child
enticement-sexual contact count.
¶9 On the basis of these facts, the parties stipulated
that Attorney Engl's convictions of the two felonies constituted
violations of SCR 20:8.4(b).2
¶10 The second matter relates to Attorney Engl's
representation of K.W. and R.W., who retained Attorney Engl to
represent them in a bankruptcy proceeding. K.W. and R.W. gave
Attorney Engl advance fees that totaled $2,300, which he was
obligated to hold in trust until earned. Because Attorney Engl
did not maintain a client trust account at the time he received
these advance fees, he gave them to an attorney with whom he
shared office space, who placed the funds into that attorney's
client trust account. Attorney Engl did not have any formal
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; . . . ."
5
No. 2013AP314-D
professional association with the attorney whose trust account
contained K.W. and R.W.'s funds.
¶11 After K.W. and R.W. learned of the felony charges
against Attorney Engl, they concluded that he would be unable to
represent them in their bankruptcy and requested a full refund
of the advance fees they had paid to him. K.W. and R.W. did
ultimately receive a full refund of their money.
¶12 Attorney Engl's handling of K.W. and R.W.'s advance
fees supports a second count of misconduct. By failing to
maintain his own trust account and instead placing the clients'
advance fees into a trust account that he neither owned nor
controlled, thereby placing the funds at risk of being
improperly used by a third party with whom he had no recognized
professional association, Attorney Engl violated
SCR 20:1.15(b)(1) and (4).3
3
SCR 20:1.15(b)(1) and (4) states:
(1) Separate account. A lawyer shall hold in
trust, separate from the lawyer's own property, that
property of clients and 3rd parties that is in the
lawyer's possession in connection with a
representation. All funds of clients and 3rd parties
paid to a lawyer or law firm in connection with a
representation shall be deposited in one or more
identifiable trust accounts.
. . .
(4) Unearned fees and cost advances. Except as
provided in par. (4m), unearned fees and advanced
payments of fees shall be held in trust until earned
by the lawyer, and withdrawn pursuant to sub. (g).
Funds advanced by a client or 3rd party for payment of
costs shall be held in trust until the costs are
incurred.
6
No. 2013AP314-D
¶13 Having considered this matter, we approve the
stipulation and adopt the stipulated facts and legal conclusions
of professional misconduct. Given the seriousness of the felony
criminal convictions that underlie Count One of the OLR's
complaint in this matter and the fact that Attorney Engl was
previously disciplined for a similar criminal conviction, we
agree that the revocation of his license to practice law in this
state is an appropriate level of discipline. Because K.W. and
R.W. ultimately received a full refund of their advance fees, we
do not impose any restitution. Finally, because Attorney Engl
entered into a comprehensive stipulation under SCR 22.12,
thereby obviating the need for the appointment of a referee and
a full disciplinary proceeding, we do not impose costs in this
matter.
¶14 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Joseph M. Engl to
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this
order.
¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Joseph M. Engl shall comply
with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a
person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been
revoked.
7