Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Stephen M. Compton

Citation: 2013 WI 42

Docket Number: 

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2013-05-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
2013 WI 42 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2010AP1118-D   
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against  Stephen M. Compton, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Stephen M. Compton, 
          Respondent.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST COMPTON     
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
May 17, 2013   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
 
 
 
2013 WI 42
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2010AP1118-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Stephen M. Compton, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Stephen M. Compton, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
MAY 17, 2013 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding.   Reinstatement granted 
upon conditions.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   We review a report filed by referee 
James J. Winiarski recommending that the court reinstate, with 
conditions, the license of Stephen M. Compton to practice law in 
Wisconsin.  After careful review of the matter, we agree that 
Attorney Compton's license should be reinstated and that 
conditions should be placed upon his resumption of the practice 
of law.  We also agree with the referee that Attorney Compton 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
2 
 
should be required to pay the costs of this reinstatement 
proceeding, which are $4,373.03 as of March 11, 2013. 
¶2 
Attorney Compton was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1992.  He resides in Waukesha County.  In 2002, he 
was publicly reprimanded for falsely recording the time he 
worked on a contingency fee case.  Public Reprimand of 
Stephen M. Compton, No. 2002-6.  In 2008, Attorney Compton's 
license to practice law was suspended for 60 days for misconduct 
related to failing to supervise an inmate performing legal work 
for him and falsely billing the state public defender for work 
performed by that inmate.  In re Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Compton, 2008 WI 3, 306 Wis. 2d 280, 744 N.W.2d 78. 
¶3 
In 2009, Attorney Compton was charged with felony 
criminal conduct in Walworth County.  He was ultimately 
convicted of possession of narcotic drugs (heroin), a Class I 
felony, and felony bail jumping, a Class H felony.  Two 
additional 
misdemeanor criminal charges for possession of 
cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia were dismissed but 
read in. 
¶4 
On March 3, 2010, the Office of Lawyer Regulation 
(OLR) filed a motion seeking the summary suspension of Attorney 
Compton's law license based on the criminal convictions.  
Attorney Compton did not contest the motion, and this court 
summarily suspended his law license on March 16, 2010. 
¶5 
In May of 2010, the OLR filed a disciplinary complaint 
alleging Attorney Compton's criminal conduct and seeking a two-
year license suspension.  Attorney Compton stipulated to the 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
3 
 
facts, misconduct, and sanction.  On September 8, 2010, this 
court suspended Attorney Compton's law license for a period of 
two years, retroactive to March 16, 2010, the date of the 
summary suspension.  In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Compton, 2010 WI 112, 329 Wis. 2d 318, 787 N.W.2d 831. 
¶6 
Attorney 
Compton 
filed 
a 
petition 
for 
the 
reinstatement of his law license on March 12, 2012.  The OLR 
filed its response to the petition for reinstatement on 
November 2, 2012, and did not oppose the petition.  A public 
hearing on the reinstatement petition was held on December 18, 
2012.  The referee filed his report and recommendation on 
February 19, 2013. 
¶7 
Supreme Court Rule 22.31(1)1 provides the standards to 
be met for reinstatement.  Specifically, the petitioner must 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.31(1) states: 
The petitioner has the burden of demonstrating, 
by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence, all 
of the following: 
(a) That he or she has the moral character to 
practice law in Wisconsin. 
(b) That his or her resumption of the practice of 
law will not be detrimental to the administration of 
justice or subversive of the public interest. 
(c) That 
his or her representations in the 
petition, including the representations required by 
SCR 
22.29(4)(a) 
to 
[(4m)] 
and 
22.29(5), 
are 
substantiated. 
(d) That he or she has complied fully with the 
terms of the order of suspension or revocation and 
with the requirements of SCR 22.26. 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
4 
 
show by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that he or 
she has the moral character to practice law, that his or her 
resumption of the practice of law will not be detrimental to the 
administration of justice or subversive of the public interest, 
and that he or she has complied with SCR 22.26 and the terms of 
the order of suspension.  In addition to these requirements, 
SCRs 22.29(4)(a)-(4m)2 provide additional requirements that a 
                                                 
2 SCR 22.29(4)(a) through (4m) provides that a petition for 
reinstatement shall show all of the following: 
(a) The 
petitioner 
desires 
to 
have 
the 
petitioner's license reinstated. 
(b) The petitioner has not practiced law during 
the period of suspension or revocation. 
(c) The petitioner has complied fully with the 
terms of the order of suspension or revocation and 
will 
continue 
to 
comply 
with 
them 
until 
the 
petitioner's license is reinstated. 
(d) The petitioner has maintained competence and 
learning in the law by attendance at identified 
educational activities. 
(e) The petitioner's conduct since the suspension 
or revocation has been exemplary and above reproach. 
(f) The petitioner has a proper understanding of 
and attitude toward the standards that are imposed 
upon members of the bar and will act in conformity 
with the standards. 
(g) The petitioner can safely be recommended to 
the legal profession, the courts and the public as a 
person fit to be consulted by others and to represent 
them and otherwise act in matters of trust and 
confidence and in general to aid in the administration 
of justice as a member of the bar and as an officer of 
the courts. 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
5 
 
petition for reinstatement must show.  All of these additional 
requirements are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1). 
¶8 
When we review a referee's report and recommendation, 
we will adopt the referee's findings of fact unless they are 
clearly erroneous.  Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.  
See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 
14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747. 
¶9 
We 
conclude 
the 
referee's 
findings 
support 
a 
determination that Attorney Compton has met his burden to 
establish by clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence that 
he has met all of the standards required for reinstatement. 
¶10 The referee noted that during the term of his 
suspension, Attorney Compton has not practiced law and has 
worked primarily as a landscaper.  The referee found that 
Attorney Compton has fully complied with the terms of the order 
of suspension and that he was not required to make any 
                                                                                                                                                             
(h) The petitioner has fully complied with the 
requirements set forth in SCR 22.26. 
(j) The petitioner's proposed use of the license 
if reinstated. 
(k) A full description of all of the petitioner's 
business activities during the period of suspension or 
revocation. 
(4m) The petitioner has made restitution to or 
settled all claims of persons injured or harmed by 
petitioner's misconduct, including reimbursement to 
the Wisconsin lawyers' fund for client protection for 
all payments made from that fund, or, if not, the 
petitioner's explanation of the failure or inability 
to do so. 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
6 
 
restitution or settle any claims caused by his misconduct.  The 
referee found that Attorney Compton has maintained competence 
and learning in the law by attending various educational 
activities.  The referee also found that Attorney Compton's 
conduct since the time of the suspension has been exemplary and 
above reproach.   
¶11 The referee found that Attorney Compton has a proper 
understanding of and attitude toward the standards that are 
imposed upon members of the bar and will act in conformity with 
those standards.  The referee found that Attorney Compton can 
safely be recommended to the legal profession, the courts, and 
the public as a person fit to be consulted by others and to 
represent them and otherwise act in matters of trust and 
confidence and in general to aid in the administration of 
justice as a member of the bar and as an officer of the courts.  
The referee noted that if his license to practice law is 
reinstated, Attorney Compton intends to engage in the general 
practice of law, probably as a sole practitioner. 
¶12 The 
referee found that, according to statements 
Attorney Compton made to Walworth County sheriff's deputies at 
the time of his 2009 arrest, Attorney Compton began using 
illegal drugs around 2006, and he admitted being "coked up" 
while handling legal cases in court.  The referee noted that 
Deputy 
Sergeant 
Patek 
of 
the 
Walworth 
County 
Sheriff's 
Department testified at the reinstatement hearing that Attorney 
Compton's conduct before his arrest included possession and 
delivery of both heroin and cocaine.  Deputy Sheriff Long of the 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
7 
 
Walworth County Sheriff's Department testified that Attorney 
Compton's conduct before his arrest had a major impact on a 
woman who was a significant person in Attorney Compton's life, 
and the woman ultimately lost her teaching license as a result 
of drug conduct and her relationship with Attorney Compton.  
Deputy Sheriff Long described Attorney Compton as a "great 
person" and "a very smart attorney." 
¶13 The referee noted that Linda Albert, manager of the 
Wisconsin 
Lawyers 
Assistance Program (WisLAP) worked with 
Attorney Compton beginning on October 26, 2009, when he 
initially volunteered for one year of monitoring following his 
arrest.  Attorney Compton subsequently volunteered for an 
additional four years of monitoring.  Ms. Albert testified that 
Attorney Compton, without hesitation, has provided access to all 
of his treatment providers, probation officers, and the OLR, and 
that he has demonstrated honesty and integrity throughout the 
monitoring process.  Ms. Albert opined that Attorney Compton has 
done an exemplary job of fulfilling his monitoring contract and 
has excelled in consistently meeting the conditions set for him. 
¶14 Ms. Albert testified Attorney Compton has a low risk 
of relapsing given the extended period of time he has been free 
of drugs and alcohol.  Ms. Albert opined that Attorney Compton 
is "no longer impaired by his disease and is fit to practice."  
She recommended that Attorney Compton complete his contract for 
five years of monitoring, which is scheduled to end on 
October 1, 2014.  Ms. Albert testified that after five years of 
being 
alcohol 
and 
drug 
free, 
a 
person's 
relapse 
rate 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
8 
 
statistically is approximately 14 percent, and she said that 
rate does not significantly drop with longer abstinence. 
¶15 Ms. Albert testified she could not think of a single 
additional thing Attorney Compton could have done during his 
monitoring to help with his rehabilitation, and she said he did 
everything he was asked to do and there were no failures on his 
part during his monitoring.  While Ms. Albert does not believe 
Attorney Compton requires monitoring beyond October 1, 2014, she 
agrees that if he is reinstated, the public would be better 
protected if his monitoring were to continue past that date. 
¶16 The referee noted that Attorney Compton successfully 
completed 
residential 
treatment 
at 
a 
hospital. 
 
He 
has 
successfully passed all required random drug and alcohol tests, 
completed all required contacts with his monitor, and completed 
and documented all required community support groups and 
outpatient treatment.  The referee also noted that as of 
December 18, 2012, Attorney Compton successfully met all 
requirements to be discharged from probation which resulted from 
his criminal convictions. 
¶17 The referee noted that since the time of his arrest, 
Attorney Compton lost his marriage, became estranged from his 
children for a period of time, lost the trust and confidence of 
the lawyers he used to work with, went through bankruptcy, and 
lost substantial investments and assets.  The referee noted that 
several 
lawyers 
who 
testified 
at 
the 
hearing 
on 
the 
reinstatement petition said they watched Attorney Compton lose 
everything that was important to him and that he hit "the very 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
9 
 
bottom."  However, those lawyers also said they have watched 
Attorney 
Compton 
slowly 
recover 
and 
reestablish 
strong 
relationships with his children and his community.  Those 
lawyers 
believe 
Attorney 
Compton's 
journey 
through 
rehabilitation has been remarkable and that he is again fit to 
practice law. 
¶18 Both Deputy Sergeant Patek and Deputy Sheriff Long 
recognize Attorney Compton's successful rehabilitation to date, 
but both men believe the period of Attorney Compton's suspension 
has not been sufficient, given the seriousness of his criminal 
conduct.  Both believe that more time is needed before Attorney 
Compton is reinstated to the practice of law. 
¶19 While the referee said the seriousness of Attorney 
Compton's conduct cannot be overstated, the referee concluded 
that since his 2009 arrest, Attorney Compton has done everything 
conceivable to turn his life around and begin the life-long 
process of rehabilitation.  The referee explained: 
Compton has not undertaken the long and arduous 
rehabilitation process for purposes of fooling the 
system into giving back his license, but rather with 
the determined goal of truthfully turning his life 
around and again becoming a productive and meaningful 
member of society. . . .  
Compton 
willingly 
accepted 
all 
treatment, 
suggestions[,] and monitoring.  He has genuinely 
impressed every individual he has worked with during 
his years of monitoring and rehabilitation. . . .  
My personal observations during the course of the 
hearing concur with the observations of everybody who 
has worked with Compton since 2009.  Compton is a man 
humbled by his great and numerous errors.  For a 
while, he lost everything that meant anything to him 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
10 
 
in his life.  I am quite satisfied that Compton is 
most sincere in his efforts to rehabilitate himself.  
I believe Compton recognizes that even if he never 
practiced law again, he would make the same efforts 
toward rehabilitation that he has made since 2009. 
The record shows that Compton never tried to avoid, 
evade[,] 
or 
blame 
others 
for 
his 
inappropriate 
conduct.  He does not lie about or cover up what he 
did.  His approach has been to "bare his soul," ask 
for help, and do whatever it takes to turn his life 
around. 
I specifically asked Linda Albert of WisLAP whether 
there was anything Compton failed to do or anything 
more he could have done as part of his monitoring 
program.  Linda Albert was quick to reply that there 
was nothing more the monitoring program could ask of 
Compton that he has not already done.  Simply put, 
Compton's sincere efforts at rehabilitation have been 
outstanding and above question. 
¶20 In spite of Attorney Compton's remarkable efforts to 
turn his life around, the referee did express some concern about 
the possibility of relapse.  Although Ms. Albert put the risk of 
a relapse at approximately 14 percent for someone who has been 
free of drugs and alcohol for five years, the referee said when 
it comes to trusting a lawyer to serve the public and the legal 
profession, a 14 percent relapse rate still needs to be 
addressed.  For that reason, the referee recommends that 
Attorney Compton remain under close monitoring, similar to his 
current WisLAP monitoring, for a minimum of two years from the 
date of his reinstatement.  The referee said extending the 
monitoring deadline beyond the October 1, 2014 expiration of his 
current WisLAP monitoring agreement will not only provide 
further support for Attorney Compton, but will also allow a 
quicker response to any relapse. 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
11 
 
¶21 In response to the concerns of the two sheriff's 
deputies that Attorney Compton's term of suspension has been 
insufficient given his criminal convictions, the referee pointed 
out that this court saw fit to suspend Attorney Compton's 
license for a period of two years.  The referee said during that 
two-year period, Attorney Compton has done everything possible 
to rehabilitate himself; he appears rehabilitated; and expert 
testimony shows there is very little more that can be done for 
him.  The referee said to deny reinstatement on the basis that a 
two-year suspension was not long enough would be second guessing 
this court's choice of the appropriate period of suspension and 
would also be ignoring Attorney Compton's nearly perfect record 
at rehabilitation up to this time. 
¶22 This court has carefully evaluated whether Attorney 
Compton has indeed met the requirements for the reinstatement of 
his license to practice law in Wisconsin, and we conclude that 
he has.  The behavior that led to his 2010 suspension was very 
serious. 
 
However, 
Attorney 
Compton 
acknowledged 
the 
wrongfulness 
of 
his 
conduct, 
voluntarily 
entered 
into 
a 
rehabilitation program, and, according to everyone who testified 
at the hearing on the reinstatement petition, he has in fact 
turned his life around and is ready to resume the practice of 
law.  We agree with the referee that Attorney Compton has met 
his burden of proof with respect to all elements needed to 
justify his reinstatement.  We stress that we expect the 
exemplary behavior which Attorney Compton has exhibited during 
No. 
2010AP1118-D   
 
12 
 
the period of his suspension to continue once he resumes the 
practice of law. 
¶23 We share the referee's concern about making every 
reasonable effort to ensure that Attorney Compton does not 
relapse.  For that reason we agree with the referee that 
Attorney Compton should continue to participate in a monitoring 
program for a period of two years from the date of his 
reinstatement.  We also agree with the referee that Attorney 
Compton should pay the full costs of this proceeding. 
¶24 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Stephen M. Compton 
to practice law in Wisconsin is reinstated effective the date of 
this order. 
¶25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as a condition of the 
reinstatement of his license to practice law in Wisconsin, 
Stephen M. Compton shall continue to participate in a WisLAP 
monitoring program and he shall comply with all conditions 
imposed as part of that program for a period of two years from 
the date of this order. 
¶26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, Stephen M. Compton shall pay to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding, which are 
$4,373.03. 
¶27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all of the 
terms of this order remains a condition of Stephen M. Compton's 
license to practice law in Wisconsin.