Summary
This Appellate Division, Third Department opinion addresses a motion for discipline by consent filed by the Attorney Grievance Committee against respondent Bradley John Moses. The respondent conditionally admitted to three violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct stemming from illegal conduct and misleading media statements made during his political campaign. After weighing aggravating and mitigating factors, including the respondent's cooperation, contrition, and treatment efforts, the court granted the joint motion and imposed a censure as the appropriate sanction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the joint motion for discipline by consent is proper
- Whether a censure is an appropriate sanction under the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters
Holdings
- The court held that the procedural requirements for a motion for discipline by consent were satisfied and the joint motion may be granted.
- The court held that a censure is an appropriate sanction given the totality of the circumstances, including aggravating and mitigating factors.
Key quotations
“Given the totality of the circumstances, we grant the parties' motion and censure respondent.”
Factual background
Respondent admitted to illegal conduct during a political campaign, including ingestion of an illegal substance and misleading statements to the media, and submitted an affidavit acknowledging three violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Both parties presented aggravating and mitigating factors and agreed that a censure was appropriate.
Procedural history
The Attorney Grievance Committee filed a petition alleging misconduct; a referee was appointed and the hearing stayed; the parties submitted a stipulation of facts and jointly moved for discipline by consent, which was reviewed by this appellate division.