On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility
Before FARRELL and GLICKMAN, Associate Judges, and SCHWELB, Senior Judge.
In this reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, the Board on Professional Responsibility has recommended that this court impose discipline identical in all material respects*fn1 to the discipline ordered by the Supreme Court of Arizona. Specifically the Board has proposed that Reed be suspended from practice in the District of Columbia for three years and that he be required to demonstrate fitness as a condition of reinstatement. Although Bar Counsel urged the Board to recommend disbarrment, he now takes no exception to the recommended discipline. Reed has not participated in the proceedings in this jurisdiction and has not excepted to the proposed sanction.
The relevant facts, to the extent that the Board knew them,*fn2 as well as the applicable legal principles, are described in the Board's concise and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, which was written by James P. Mercurio, Esquire. We adopt the Board's Report and attach a copy thereof to this opinion. Our deferential standard of review of the Board's recommendation is even more deferential where, as here, neither Bar Counsel nor the respondent has excepted to it. See, e.g., In re Goldsborough, 654 A.2d 1285, 1288 (D.C. 1995). Indeed, where there has been no objection, imposition of identical discipline "should be close to automatic, with minimum review by both the Board and this court." In re Cole, 809 A.2d 1226, 1227 n.3 (D.C. 2002) (per curiam).
Accordingly, Christopher H. Reed is hereby suspended from practice in the District of Columbia for a period of three years. As a condition of reinstatement, Reed must furnish proof of rehabilitation in a proceeding pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 16.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of:
CHRISTOPHER H. REED, D.C. App. No. 07-BG-88 :
Bar Docket No. 383-06 A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals : (Bar Registration No. 451941)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
This reciprocal discipline matter is predicated on an order of the Supreme Court of Arizona (the "Arizona Court") that (1) suspended Respondent from the practice of law for three years with the equivalent of a fitness requirement,*fn4 (2) ordered that, upon reinstatement, he be placed on probation for two years (with terms to be decided at the time of reinstatement), and (3) ordered him to pay a total of $25,818.58 in restitution to eight individuals and the Maricopa County, Arizona, Clerk of Court. Respondent has filed no response to Bar Counsel's statement and has not otherwise communicated to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (the "Court") or the Board on Professional Responsibility (the "Board") regarding this matter. Bar Counsel urges that we recommend the "substantially different reciprocal discipline of disbarrment." Statement of Bar Counsel, p. 4.
We have concluded that no basis exists for substantially different discipline in this matter and recommend that the Court impose a suspension for three years, with a requirement that Respondent furnish proof of ...