P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

Cite as In re O’Dell, 19 DB Rptr 287 (2005)
Fernando Moore
(Case No. 04-60)
Facts
11.
In September 2002, the Accused was appointed to represent Fernando Moore
(“Moore”) to appeal his postconviction trial. The Accused did not notify Moore of
his appointment or communicate with him in any manner. The Accused submitted
a number of requests to the Court of Appeals to allow him additional time to submit
the opening brief, and was notified that the case would be dismissed if the opening
brief was not filed by September 5, 2003. The Accused did not file a brief or take
any other action. The Accused was replaced by successor counsel in December 2003.
12.
On March 2, 2004, the Oregon State Bar received a complaint from Moore
regarding the Accused’s conduct. On March 3, 2004, Disciplinary Counsel’s Office
forwarded a copy of that complaint to the Accused and requested his response on or
before March 24, 2004. The Accused made no response to the Bar’s inquiry despite
an additional request from Disciplinary Counsel’s Office on April 16, 2004, that he
do so.
Violations
13.
The Accused admits that, by engaging in the conduct described in paragraphs
11 and 12 of this stipulation, he violated DR 6-101(B) (neglect of a legal matter) and
DR 1-103(C) (failure to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation) of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Jason Wright
(Case No. 04-61)
Facts
14.
On March 10, 2004, the Oregon State Bar received a complaint from Jason
Wright (“Wright”) alleging that the Accused had neglected Wright’s criminal appeal.
On March 12, 2004, Disciplinary Counsel’s Office forwarded a copy of that
complaint to the Accused and requested his response on or before April 2, 2004. The
Accused made no response to the Bar’s inquiry despite an additional request from
Disciplinary Counsel’s Office on April 16, 2004, that he do so.
290