Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the
Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound
volumes go to press.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
No. 17-BG-488
11/09/2017
IN RE DARRELL N. FULLER, RESPONDENT.
A Member of the Bar
of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
(Bar Registration No. 499204)
On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional
Responsibility Ad Hoc Hearing Committee
Approving Petition for Negotiated Discipline
(BDN 008-16)
(Decided: November 9, 2017)
Before BECKWITH and EASTERLY, Associate Judges, and NEBEKER, Senior
Judge.
Opinion for the court PER CURIAM.
Dissenting opinion by Senior Judge NEBEKER at page 5.
PER CURIAM: This decision is non-precedential. Please refer to D.C. Bar R.
XI, § 12.1 (d) governing the appropriate citation of this opinion.
In this disciplinary matter, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board
on Professional Responsibility Ad Hoc Hearing Committee (the Committee)
recommends approval of the petition for negotiated attorney discipline. The
2
violation stems from respondent Darrell N. Fuller’s professional misconduct
wherein he used his work-issued phone to take lewd photographs and videos of
clothed, unaware, and nonconsenting individuals and then stored those images on
his work computer.
Respondent acknowledged that he engaged in deceitful conduct and violated
Rule 8.4 (c) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct. In
mitigation, the Committee considered the fact that respondent (1) cooperated with
Bar Counsel; (2) had been diagnosed with Voyeuristic Disorder (in remission); (3)
voluntarily consented to an independent medical examination that resulted in a
determination that he posed a low risk of recidivism for the conduct described; (4)
promptly reported his guilty plea and acknowledged his misconduct from the
outset of Disciplinary Counsel’s investigation; (5) already served a suspension
lasting over one year; (6) immediately sought treatment upon his arrest;1 (7)
demonstrated remorse for his actions; and (8) had no prior history of discipline in
any jurisdiction. As a result, Disciplinary Counsel and respondent negotiated the
1
Initially, respondent pled guilty to violating a Texas statute for improper
photography or visual recording and the District Court of Harris County, Texas,
deferred any adjudication of guilt for five years and placed him on community
supervision. Respondent obtained an order dismissing the indictment against him,
however, after the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas struck down as
unconstitutional the subsection of the statute under which respondent was charged.
See Ex parte Thompson, 442 S.W.3d 325 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
3
imposition of discipline in the form of a two-year suspension, stayed, and two
years of unsupervised probation during which respondent must (1) submit monthly
reports to Disciplinary Counsel self-certifying his compliance with the treatment
directions of his psychiatrist and other providers; (2) submit monthly reports to
Disciplinary Counsel self-certifying that he attended at least one Sex Addicts
Anonymous meeting in that month period; (3) immediately seek counseling from a
Certified Sex Addiction Therapist should his treatment regimen appear
insufficient; (4) waive privilege, to the extent necessary, for Disciplinary Counsel
to verify his compliance with the terms of his probation; and (5) not engage in any
misconduct in this or any jurisdiction. Additionally, if Disciplinary Counsel has
probable cause to believe respondent violated the terms of the probation, it may
seek to revoke respondent’s probation pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 3 and D.C
Board R. 18.3 and request that respondent serve the two-year suspension
consecutive to any other discipline or suspension that may be imposed. Further, a
showing of fitness will be required before he is allowed to resume the practice of
law.
After reviewing the petition for negotiated discipline, considering a
supporting affidavit, conducting a limited hearing, reviewing Disciplinary
Counsel’s files and records, and holding an ex parte meeting with Disciplinary
Counsel, the Committee concluded that the petition for negotiated discipline
4
should be approved.
We accept the Committee’s recommendation because the Committee
properly applied D.C. Bar R. XI § 12.1 (c) and we find no error in the Committee’s
determination. Based upon the record before the court, the negotiated discipline of
a two-year suspension, stayed, and two years of unsupervised probation with
conditions is not unduly lenient considering the existence of extensive mitigating
factors.
In accordance with our procedures in uncontested disciplinary cases, we
agree that this case is appropriate for negotiated discipline, and we accept the
Committee’s recommendation. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Darrell N. Fuller is hereby suspended from the practice of
law in the District of Columbia for two years, stayed, and two years of
unsupervised probation during which respondent must (1) submit monthly reports
to Disciplinary Counsel self-certifying his compliance with the treatment directions
of his psychiatrist and other providers; (2) submit monthly reports to Disciplinary
Counsel self-certifying that he attended at least one Sex Addicts Anonymous
meeting in that month period; (3) immediately seek counseling from a Certified
Sex Addiction Therapist should his treatment regimen appear insufficient; (4)
5
waive privilege, to the extent necessary, for Disciplinary Counsel to verify his
compliance with the terms of his probation; and (5) not engage in any misconduct
in this or any jurisdiction. Should respondent violate the terms of his probation, he
will be suspended with reinstatement conditioned on demonstrating his fitness to
practice law.
So ordered.
NEBEKER, Senior Judge, dissenting. I would reject the request for approval
of the petition for negotiated attorney discipline. I believe the conditions of
respondent’s probation should require his psychiatrist to submit monthly reports to
Disciplinary Counsel verifying his compliance with treatment directions and
expressing an opinion on his risk of recidivism.