In Re the Petition for Reinstatement to the Bar of Siegel

*636ORDER. Smith and Eldridge, JJ., dissent. Smith, J., would have denied readmission. Eldridge, J., filed a dissenting opinion at page 637 infra.

ORDER

The Court having disbarred Maurice T. Siegel on July 14, 1975 following his conviction in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland of the felony of wilful evasion of federal income taxes in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201 (Bar Ass’n of Balto. City v. Siegel, 275 Md. 521, 340 A.2d 710 (1975)); and

Maurice T. Siegel having filed a petition on April 3, 1981 for reinstatement to the Bar of Maryland, and the petition having been referred by the Court to an Inquiry Panel of the Attorney Grievance Commission; and

The Inquiry Panel having conducted an evidentiary hearing and recommended that the petitioner be reinstated to the Bar of this State upon satisfactory completion of an intensified legal education course in criminal law and procedure, this being the petitioner’s specialty prior to his disbarment; and

The Inquiry Panel having also recommended that upon reinstatement the petitioner be supervised in his practice for a period of time, as may be determined by the Court, by other counsel satisfactory to Bar Counsel; and

The Review Board of the Attorney Grievance Commission having concurred in the recommendations of the Inquiry Panel; and

The Court having conducted a hearing upon the petition for reinstatement and been advised that the petitioner is agreeable to the conditions recommended by the Inquiry Panel, and would also agree to limit his practice to the field of criminal law; and

The Court having reviewed the evidence adduced before the Inquiry Panel, and having considered the principles governing readmission to the bar as set forth in In re *637Braverman, 271 Md. 196, 316 A.2d 246 (1974) and In re Barton, 291 Md. 61, 432 A.2d 1335 (1981); and

The Court having concluded that the petition for reinstatement should be granted upon satisfactory compliance with the condition precedent recommended by the Inquiry Panel and Review Board, it is this 22nd day of November, 1982,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that action on the petition for reinstatement be deferred pending completion by the petitioner of an intensified legal education course in criminal law and procedure, as may be selected by the petitioner with the approval of Bar Counsel; and it is further

ORDERED that upon satisfactory completion by the petitioner of such intensified legal education course, and notification thereof to this Court, the petitioner will be readmitted to the bar upon the conditions above set forth, subject to further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that the petitioner pay the costs of these proceedings prior to reinstatement.

Judge Smith would have denied readmission.