In re Angst

278 Kan. 500 (2004) · Supreme Court of Kansas · December 3, 2004

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court imposed published censure on attorney Allen B. Angst for violating KRPC 8.4(b) by committing misdemeanor domestic battery. The court rejected the respondent’s exceptions concerning the factual finding that he grabbed and pushed his wife, his state of mind, and his acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and adopted the disciplinary panel’s findings and recommendation.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam
Jurisdiction
Kansas
Decision date
December 3, 2004
Procedural posture
Original contested attorney-discipline proceeding brought by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator. The respondent stipulated to the allegations and to his misdemeanor domestic-battery conviction, but excepted to several factual and disciplinary findings.
Standard of review
The Kansas Supreme Court independently considers the evidence, the disciplinary panel's findings, and the parties' arguments to determine whether a KRPC violation occurred and what discipline should be imposed. Misconduct must be established by substantial, clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence. Panel findings are advisory and are adopted when amply sustained by the evidence, but not when against the clear weight of the evidence.
Precedential value
Published Kansas Supreme Court opinion; precedential
Parties
Office of the Disciplinary Administrator v. Allen B. Angst
Disposition
other

Topics

appellate procedurestandard of reviewcriminal procedure

Practice areas

legal ethics and professional responsibilityattorney disciplinecriminal conduct by attorneys

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the disciplinary panel's finding that Angst grabbed and pushed his wife was supported by the evidence.
  2. Whether Angst knowingly violated his duty to the public and legal profession by committing domestic battery.
  3. Whether Angst's self-reporting of his conviction required rejection of the panel's finding that he failed to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct.
  4. What discipline was appropriate for Angst's violation of KRPC 8.4(b).

Holdings

  1. Angst's criminal conviction was conclusive evidence that he committed the domestic-battery offense in the disciplinary proceeding under Supreme Court Rule 202.
  2. The panel's finding that Angst grabbed and pushed his wife was supported by substantial, clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence and was not against the clear weight of the evidence.
  3. Angst violated KRPC 8.4(b) by committing the criminal act of domestic battery, which reflected adversely on his fitness as a lawyer.
  4. Published censure was appropriate discipline for Angst's violation of KRPC 8.4(b).

Key quotations

Respondent’s criminal conviction is conclusive evidence of the commission of that crime in a disciplinary proceeding. (504)
We have reviewed the record and adopt the panel’s findings and conclusions that respondent violated KRPC. 8.4(b). (505)
It Is Therefore Ordered that Allen B. Angst be and he is hereby disciplined by published censure in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 203(a)(3) (2003 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 226) for his violations of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct. (505)

Factual background

During a January 22, 2002, household argument, Angst grabbed and pushed his wife. His wife reported the conduct to police, and Angst was convicted of misdemeanor domestic battery after a bench trial in Dickinson County District Court. He self-reported the conviction to the Disciplinary Administrator and stipulated to the allegations in the amended disciplinary complaint.

Procedural history

Angst self-reported his Dickinson County District Court conviction for misdemeanor domestic battery. A disciplinary hearing panel concluded that he violated KRPC 8.4(b) and recommended published censure. The Kansas Supreme Court independently reviewed the evidence, adopted the panel's findings and conclusions, rejected Angst's exceptions, and imposed published censure.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…