 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Spiegel5/9/1977
Dale A. Spiegel, the attorney-respondent, is hereby disbarred and his license to practice law in the state of Colorado is revoked. His name is stricken from the roll of attorneys in Colorado and he is ordered forthwith to surrender his license to practice law in the state of Colorado to the clerk of this court.
In a formal complaint filed by the attorney general, the respondent was charged with two counts of misconduct as an attorney. After a hearing before our grievance committee, at which the respondent was represented by counsel and testified in his own behalf, the grievance committee submitted a report containing findings that both charges against him had been clearly and convincingly established by the evidence presented at the
hearing. Premised on these findings, the grievance committee concluded that this attorney-respondent had violated in several respects the Code of Professional Responsibility. We approve and adopt the findings and conclusions of our grievance committee and we rule that disbarment is the appropriate disciplinary action in this matter.
It must also be noted that this attorney-respondent has been the subject of a private reprimand administered by this court in February 1975 in connection with other charges of misconduct, and later, he received from this court, a public censure which is reported in People v. Spiegel, 190 Colo. 169, 544 P.2d 401 (1976).
This attorney-respondent was admitted to practice law in the state of Colorado on January 7, 1967 and maintained his law office in Boulder, Colorado.
With reference to the first count of the formal complaint, the grievance committee found that the evidence at the hearing established the following facts. On November 19, 1974, the attorney-respondent and a female companion were in an automobile owned by her when it was stopped by a police officer for exceeding the speed limit. The attorney-respondent exited from the driver's seat and went to the vehicle of the police officer where he was asked to present his driver's license. The police officer commenced to issue a traffic citation at which time the attorney-respondent suggested that his female companion had been the driver. The attorney-respondent then went to the vehicle and spoke to his female companion who then advised the police officer that she had, in fact, been the driver. The police officer was of the belief that the woman was intoxicated and that the attorney-respondent may have also been under the influence of alcohol.
The police officer arrested the woman who was permitted to consult with the attorney-respondent. Apparently on the advice of the attorney-respondent, she refused to cooperate with the police officers or take any tests. She was then incarcerated and was charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
Thereafter, the attorney-respondent continued to represent the woman on this charge before the Jefferson County Court. A not guilty plea was entered and the attorney-respondent then filed a motion to dismiss the charge. The basis of the motion was that there was no chemical test taken to prove the alcohol content of her blood at the time of her arrest and that there was no evidence that she was the driver of the motor vehicle. A hearing was held on this motion before the Jefferson County Court. During the course of the police officer's testimony, he expressed the view that it was the attorney-respondent who was, in fact, driving the vehicle in question. The police officer stated that he charged the woman with driving while under
Page 1 2 3 Colorado DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|