Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Gricel S. Echavarria

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

2007 WI 116 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2004AP499-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Gricel S. Echavarria, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Gricel S. Echavarria, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ECHAVARRIA 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
September 5, 2007   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING: ZIEGLER, J., did not participate.   
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2007 WI 116
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2004AP499-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Gricel S. Echavarria, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Gricel S. Echavarria, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
SEP 5, 2007 
 
David R. Schanker 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding.    Reinstatement granted.   
 
¶1 
PER 
CURIAM.   We 
review 
a 
referee's 
report 
recommending that Gricel Echavarria's license to practice law in 
Wisconsin be reinstated.  We adopt the referee's findings of 
fact and conclusions of law and agree that Attorney Echavarria's 
license to practice law should be reinstated.  We direct 
Attorney Echavarria to pay the costs of the reinstatement 
proceeding, which total $2478.34 as of April 5, 2007. 
¶2 
Attorney Echavarria was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 2000.  On November 17, 2003, this court summarily 
No. 
2004AP499-D   
 
2 
 
suspended Attorney Echavarria's license in the wake of her 
conviction in federal court for conspiracy to produce and 
transfer false identification documents, counterfeit resident 
alien cards, and counterfeit social security cards, in violation 
of 
18 
U.S.C. 
§§ 1028(a) 
and 
1546(a), 
and 
42 
U.S.C. 
§ 408(a)(7)(C), a class D felony.  Her (then) husband, Victor, 
was also prosecuted in connection with this scheme.  In the 
criminal proceeding, Attorney Echavarria was sentenced to 27 
months of imprisonment. 
¶3 
In the ensuing disciplinary proceeding, this court 
accepted a stipulation that the conduct for which Attorney 
Echavarria was convicted constitutes a criminal act that 
reflects adversely on her honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness 
as a lawyer, in violation of SCR 20:8.4(b).  See In re 
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Echavarria, 2004 WI 51, 271 
Wis. 2d 289, 679 N.W.2d 294.  Attorney Echavarria's license to 
practice 
law 
was 
suspended for a period of two years, 
retroactive to the date she was summarily suspended.  Id. 
¶4 
Attorney Echavarria now seeks reinstatement of her 
license to practice law in Wisconsin.  Catherine Rottier was 
appointed referee in the matter and conducted a formal hearing 
on the reinstatement petition.  The referee filed her report and 
recommendation on March 23, 2007.  Neither the Board of Bar 
Examiners (BBE) nor the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) oppose 
the referee's recommendation. 
¶5 
SCR 22.31(1) provides the standard for reinstatement 
of 
a 
law 
license. 
 
The 
petitioner 
has 
the 
burden 
of 
No. 
2004AP499-D   
 
3 
 
demonstrating "by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence" 
that the lawyer has the moral character to practice law, that 
the lawyer's resumption of the practice of law will not be 
detrimental to the administration of justice or subversive of 
the public interest, and that the lawyer has complied with SCR 
22.26 and the terms of the suspension.  In addition, SCR 
22.29(4) sets forth related requirements that a petition for 
reinstatement must show.  All of these additional requirements 
are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1). 
¶6 
This Court will adopt a referee's findings of fact 
unless they are clearly erroneous.  Conclusions of law are 
reviewed de novo.  See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Carroll, 2001 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662, 636 N.W.2d 718.   
¶7 
Attorney Echavarria was first eligible to petition for 
reinstatement in August 2005.  She filed her petition in August 
2006.  The hearing on this reinstatement petition was conducted 
in January 2007.  Several individuals testified in support of 
Attorney Echavarria's reinstatement.  Two individuals appeared 
in opposition to her petition, asserting that the serious nature 
of the underlying offenses should preclude reinstatement. 
¶8 
The referee found that Attorney Echavarria has not 
practiced law during her suspension.  She has complied with all 
the terms of her suspension, has maintained competence and 
learning in the law, and her conduct since the suspension has 
been "exemplary."  The referee found that Attorney Echavarria 
"has fully complied with the terms of the order of suspension 
and the requirements of SCR 22.26."   
No. 
2004AP499-D   
 
4 
 
¶9 
Upon review of the record we agree that Attorney 
Echavarria 
has 
established 
by 
clear, 
satisfactory, 
and 
convincing evidence that she has satisfied all the criteria 
necessary for reinstatement.  We are mindful of the concerns 
articulated by the two citizens who opposed this reinstatement. 
The underlying crime for which Attorney Echavarria was convicted 
is undoubtedly serious.  However, Attorney Echavarria has 
accepted responsibility for her criminal conduct, has served her 
sentence, and has expressed remorse. Michael Harper, Senior U.S. 
Probation Officer for the U.S. District Court for the Western 
District of Wisconsin, has advised this court that his office 
has no objections to Attorney Echavarria being reinstated and 
licensed 
to 
practice 
law. 
 
The 
OLR 
does 
not 
oppose 
reinstatement.  The record contains considerable evidence of 
Attorney 
Echavarria's 
cooperation 
with 
law 
enforcement 
authorities and the OLR, personal counseling, and efforts toward 
rehabilitation.  As the referee noted, Attorney Echavarria "has 
done everything the Court has asked her to do during the period 
of suspension."  After careful consideration, we therefore 
conclude that the record before this court supports the 
referee's findings that Attorney Echavarria has established by 
clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that she has 
satisfied all the criteria necessary for reinstatement.   
¶10 Accordingly, we adopt the referee's findings of fact 
and 
conclusions 
of 
law 
and 
we 
accept 
the 
referee's 
recommendation to reinstate Attorney Echavarria's license to 
practice law in Wisconsin subject to her compliance with 
No. 
2004AP499-D   
 
5 
 
mandatory 
continuing 
legal 
education 
(CLE) 
reporting 
requirements.  We further direct Attorney Echavarria to pay the 
costs of the reinstatement proceeding. 
¶11 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of 
the license of Gricel S. Echavarria to practice law in Wisconsin 
is granted, effective the date of this order, subject to her 
compliance with mandatory CLE reporting requirements. 
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within six months of the 
date of this order Gricel S. Echavarria pay to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding.  If the costs 
are not paid within the time specified, and absent a showing to 
this court of her inability to pay the costs within that time, 
the license of Gricel S. Echavarria to practice law in Wisconsin 
shall be suspended until further order of the court. 
¶13 ANNETTE K. ZIEGLER, J., did not participate. 
 
No. 
2004AP499-D   
 
 
 
1