 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Lafont4/1/2005
Upon review of the findings and recommendation of the hearing committee and the disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Henry J. Lafont, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 8094, be suspended from the practice of law in Louisiana for a period of ninety days. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, §10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.
Retired Judge Melvin A. Shortess, assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Associate Justice John L. Weimer, recused.
JOHNSON, J., would impose a more severe penalty.
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
In this matter, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") seeks review of a ruling of the disciplinary board ordering that respondent, Henry J. Lafont, Jr., be publicly reprimanded.
UNDERLYING FACTS
Count I -- The Bone Matter
In 1996, respondent was retained to represent Robert M. Bone in a second degree murder case pending in Lafourche Parish. The crime was particularly heinous and the district attorney's office refused respondent's efforts to plead the charge down to manslaughter. Under the circumstances, respondent advised Mr. Bone that it would be in his best interest to plead guilty to second degree murder, to show remorse, and to save the State the expense and cost of a trial. Respondent suggested to Mr. Bone that this course of action would improve his chances for obtaining a commutation of his life sentence, because there would be no public record of the specific details of the brutal crime. Respondent also conveyed to Mr. Bone his confidence that he could obtain a letter of "no comment" from the district attorney at the time he applied for commutation, although no such letter then existed or was promised to be forthcoming.
In December 1996, Mr. Bone pled guilty to the second degree murder charge. In connection with the guilty plea, the presiding judge, Judge Jerome J. Barbera, III, conducted a Boykin examination of Mr. Bone, as follows:
Q: The sentence for second degree murder is imprisonment at hard labor without the benefit of probation, parole or suspension of sentence. And that is not discretionary. I have no choice. If I accept your plea today, then that is what the sentence of this court must be. Has anyone assured you, Mr. Bone, or led you to believe that if you enter a plea of guilty to this charge today that at some time in the future that your sentence may be commuted to a term of years or that you may somehow be given favorable treatment either by the governor or by the department of probation and parole; has anyone promised you that?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: I know that you have had maybe discussions with your lawyer about that.
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: But no one has made any assurances to you or any promises to you that anything favorable will happen in the future in your case; is that correct?
A: That's correct.
THE COURT: Mr. Lafont, are you satisfied that your client understands his rights and the consequences of his plea?
MR. LAFONT: Yes, I am, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. And you also assure the Court that as far as you know he has not been made any promises as to the favorable disposition of his case which might be different from what we have discussed here today?
MR. LAFONT: That is correct, Judge. [emphasis added] Satisfied that Mr. Bone understood the consequences of his plea, the judge sentenced him to life in pri
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Louisiana DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|