The court’s disciplinary administrator initially recommended a one-year suspension of Kepfield’s law license after he failed to follow agreed actions in the case, but the Supreme Court suspended that suspension in its final order, according to a filing Friday on the court’s website.
A formal complaint was filed against Kepfield on July 16, 2014, and a Board of Discipline Attorneys conducted a hearing on it in August. That board found Kepfield violated the rules of conduct when he took $2,000 to represent an inmate challenging computation of his good time credits, but did not timely proceed with the case.
The inmate paid Kepfield the money in November 2011. Kepfield acknowledged receiving the money, then advised the inmate he’d file a petition for habeas corpus, challenging the computation of the man’s sentence.
According to records in the case, he met with the man for the first time in mid-March 2012 but failed to respond to efforts by the inmate to meet again and missed a scheduled court hearing July 30, 2013.
The court rescheduled the hearing, but again Kepfield failed to respond to the inmate multiple times, including after receiving messages through the local prosecutor’s office and the court, and he ignored a request by the inmate to return his money.
Kepfield’s records indicate he did spend several hours researching the inmate’s case after those contacts, but he failed to meet with the inmate and he again missed the rescheduled court hearing on Aug. 27, 2013.
Kepfield did meet the inmate in prison on Sept. 3, 2013, and indicated he’d talked with the court and the prosecutor and would reopen the case, but that never occurred.
The disciplinary panel found Kepfield violated multiple rules of conduct, including failing to consult with his client and keep him informed, failing to “diligently and promptly represent” him, or notify the client he was terminating his representation or refund his retainer. The panel found Kepfield’s actions were “motivated by selfishness, as evidenced by his failure to refund the $2,000 unearned fees,” and that his actions caused actual harm to the inmate.
Records show Kepfield had a prior formal admonishment from the disciplinary administrator in 2010.
In mitigation, the panel found Kepfield “suffers from depression and has since high school,” and that “it is clear that the respondent’s depression contributed to his misconduct.”
Despite an initial failure to follow a plan, Kepfield did begin to comply with requirements prior to the court’s final ruling, the filing states, including attending support groups and “Twelve Step” meetings, and refunding the $2,000.
Full Article & Source:
Hutch attorney hit with discipline
No comments:
Post a Comment