Title: IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF FRANK J. JONES, PETITIONER

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF FRANK J. JONES, PETITIONER2004 WY 382 P.3d 1239Case Number: D-94-9Decided: 01/23/2004
OCTOBER TERM, A.D. 2003

 

                                                                                                            

 

In 
the Matter of the Petition

For 
Reinstatement of

Frank 
J. Jones, Petitioner.

 

 

ORDER 
OF REINSTATEMENT

 

[¶1]           
Following 
a hearing before the Wyoming State Board of Professional Responsibility on 
December 1 and 2, 2003, on the petition for reinstatement to the bar of the 
State of Wyoming filed by Frank J. Jones, that Board recommended that this Court 
grant the petition.  The matter is 
now before this Court as required by the provisions of Rule XXII(e) of the 
Disciplinary Code for the Wyoming State Bar (effective January 8, 1990).  This Court grants the 
petition.

 

[¶2]           
This 
Court disbarred Frank J. Jones by its order entered May 30, 1995.  On February 19, 1999, pursuant to Mr. 
Jones' guilty plea, this Court entered its judgment and sentence finding Mr. 
Jones guilty of eight counts of the unauthorized practice of law in the State of 
Wyoming and contempt of this Court, which unauthorized practice of law and 
contempt occurred after this Court's disbarment of Mr. 
Jones.

 

[¶3]           
On 
May 22, 2002, Mr. Jones filed with the Wyoming State Board of Professional 
Responsibility a petition for reinstatement to the bar of the State of 
Wyoming.  Upon receipt of that 
petition, the Board caused the matter to be investigated.  Following that investigation, the Board 
scheduled a reinstatement hearing as required by the provisions of Rule XXII(e) 
of the Disciplinary Code for the Wyoming State Bar (effective January 8, 
1990).  The board conducted that 
hearing on December 1 and 2, 2003, at the offices of the Wyoming State Bar, 500 
Randall Avenue, Cheyenne, Wyoming.  
The Board consisted of Craig Newman, a member of the bar and chairman of 
the Board who presided; M. Greg Carlson, a member of the bar; Wendy Press 
Sweeney, a member of the bar; Joe M. Teig, a member of the bar; William H. 
Twichell, a member of the bar; Linda Lindsey, a non-lawyer; and Duane Toro, a 
non-lawyer.  Frank J. Jones 
represented himself.  Raymond W. 
Martin, a member of the bar, represented the Wyoming State Bar.  The following witnesses testified on 
behalf of Mr. Jones:  James A. 
Eddington, a member of the bar; William H. Vines, a member of the bar; Bruce A. 
Hellbaum, a member of the bar; Susan Grant Juschka; Charles B. Shellhart; Robert 
Shepard; Robert Mills Grant; Connie Good Lewis; Judy D. Williams; Stephen L. 
Simonton, a member of the bar; Kathleen Sue Willier; Laurell Marker; the 
Honorable Peter J. McNiff, a member of the bar and judge of the United States 
Bankruptcy Court; Dr. Christopher B. Reyburn, psychiatrist and medical director 
of the Behavioral Health Services, Ivinson Memorial Hospital, Laramie, 
Wyoming.  Mr. Jones testified on his 
own behalf and submitted a memorandum in support of his petition for 
reinstatement.  Professor John 
Burman, a member of the bar and a faculty member of the University of Wyoming 
College of Law, Laramie, Wyoming, testified on behalf of the Wyoming State 
Bar.  The Board admitted into 
evidence the following documents:  
report of findings of fact, conclusions of law, recommendation of 
sanction and assessment of costs and judgment of disbarment that issued from the 
disbarment proceeding; this Court's order to show cause and judgment and 
sentence pertaining to Mr. Jones' unauthorized practice of law conviction and 
contempt order; the three-volume transcript of the hearing proceedings held on 
Mr. Jones' first petition for reinstatement in 2001; the Board's report of 
findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations from the hearing on 
Mr. Jones' first reinstatement petition in 2001; this Court's order denying Mr. 
Jones' first petition for reinstatement in 2001; Mr. Jones' letter dated 
February 8, 2002, to Chief Justice Larry L. Lehman of this Court; Chief Justice 
Larry L. Lehman's letter dated February 21, 2002, to Mr. Jones; all exhibits 
admitted in the disciplinary record pertaining to Mr. Jones from the disbarment 
proceeding to present date; Dr. Christopher B. Reyburn's letter dated September 
19, 2003, pertaining to Mr. Jones' evaluation on September 9, 2003; and Dr. 
Christopher B. Reyburn's letter dated November 16, 2003, pertaining to his 
evaluation of Mr. Jones.

 

[¶4]           
The 
Board considered the testimony and credibility of the witnesses and the 
documents admitted into evidence and made the following findings of fact, 
conclusions and recommendations, which are contained in the Board's report dated 
December 17, 2003;

 

Findings 
of Fact

            
1. Frank J. Jones was disbarred by Order of the Wyoming Supreme Court 
entered May 30, 1995.

            
2.  On February 19, 1999, the 
Wyoming Supreme Court entered its Judgment and Sentence, pursuant to Mr. Jones's 
guilty plea, finding him guilty of the unauthorized practice of law in the State 
of Wyoming and contempt of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

            
3.  Mr. Jones filed his first 
Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule XXII of the Disciplinary Code of the 
Wyoming State Bar ("Rule XXII") on June 1, 2000, while still on probation for 
his guilty plea to the unauthorized practice of law.

            
4. The Board entered its Report of Findings and Recommendations, 
recommending that the first Petition for Reinstatement be denied, on March 27, 
2001 and the Wyoming Supreme Court, on May 1, 2001, entered its Order Denying 
Petition for Reinstatement to the Wyoming State Bar, approving and confirming, 
with several additional bases, the Board's March 27, 2001 Report of Findings and 
Recommendations.

            
5. Mr. Jones filed a second Petition for Reinstatement on September 18, 
2001, which petition was denied without further hearing by the Board by Order 
dated December 13, 2001; and the Wyoming Supreme Court approved and confirmed 
the Board's denial of the second petition.

            
6. Mr. Jones filed his third Petition for Reinstatement, the petition on 
which the Board conducted its hearing on December 1 and 2, 2003, on May 22, 
2002.

            
7. At the hearing on the captioned matter, the only witness who testified 
that Mr. Jones should not be reinstated was Professor John Burman.  Professor Burman testified that Mr. 
Jones should not be reinstated "at this time."  Professor Burman based that testimony, 
in part, upon his opinion and belief that Mr. Jones was not 
"rehabilitated."  However, using 
Professor Burman's own definition of rehabilitation, elicited from Professor 
Burman on cross examination, Mr. Jones has been 
rehabilitated.

            
8.  For purposes of his 
opinion on whether Mr. Jones should be reinstated as a result of the third 
Petition for Reinstatement, Professor Burman was most concerned, as were many 
members of the Board, over Mr. Jones' conduct resulting in his guilty plea to 
the unauthorized practice of law and Judgment and Sentence by the Wyoming 
Supreme Court.  The last conduct 
giving rise to that Judgment and Sentence occurred in the 1995 to 1997 time 
frame.  While the Board is as 
concerned as Professor Burman about the nature of that conduct and its 
implications, Mr. Jones expressed, to some greater or lesser degree, contrition 
for such conduct; and the Board is not persuaded that delaying a reinstatement 
of Mr. Jones, awaiting the passage of more time, will serve any useful 
purpose.

 

 

Conclusions 
of Law

 

            
1.  The parties agreed, and 
the Board concluded, that Rule XXII and the version of the Disciplinary Code of 
the Wyoming State Bar in effect prior to the November 1, 2003 effective date of 
the new Disciplinary Code of the Wyoming State Bar is and was applicable to the 
third Petition for Reinstatement of Mr. Jones and the hearing which are the 
subject of this Report of Findings, Conclusions and 
Recommendations.

            
2.  Rule XXII provides that a 
disbarred attorney seeking reinstatement must demonstrate by clear and 
convincing evidence that:

            
a.  he has been 
rehabilitated;

b.  he has complied with all requirements 
imposed by the court;

c.  he has the moral qualifications, 
competency and learning in law required for admission to practice law in 
Wyoming; and

d.  the resumption of the practice of law 
will be neither detrimental to the integrity and standing of the bar or the 
administrations of justice nor subversive to the public 
interest.

            
3.  In general, the Board 
concludes that Mr. Jones satisfied his burden of persuasion as to the required 
elements of Rule XXII.

            
4.  In attempting to make a 
determination as to whether the petitioner in this case has been rehabilitated, 
the Board was persuaded that a useful definition of "rehabilitation" is found in 
Avila v. The People of the State of Colorado, 53 [sic] P.3d 230, 232 
(Colo. PDJ 2002)[1] quoted by petitioner in 
his Memorandum in Support of Petition for Reinstatement:

Rehabilitation 
for purposes of attorney reinstatement and readmission to the bar has been 
defined as the reestablishment of the reputation of a person by his or her 
restoration to a useful and constructive place in society.' [citation 
omitted]

Based 
upon this definition and the evidence before it, the Board concludes that Mr. 
Jones demonstrated his rehabilitation.

5.  The Board also concludes that it is not 
required to find or conclude that there is, or must be demonstrated by 
petitioner, an absolute certainty or guarantee that the petitioner will never 
again engage in the kind of misconduct which led to his disbarment.  It is impossible for the Board to reach 
such a conclusion.  Further, such a 
burden places the bar too high and would doom every petition for 
reinstatement.  For these 
propositions, the Board relies on The Matter of McKeon, 656 P.2d 179 
(Mont. 1982) also cited and quoted in petitioner's Memorandum in Support of 
Petition for Reinstatement.  Rather, 
the Board concludes that it must attempt to discern, from the evidence 
presented, whether the petitioner demonstrates current moral and ethical 
behavior and fitness to reenter the practice of law.

6.  The Board concludes that Mr. Jones has 
demonstrated he is eligible for reinstatement.

 

Recommendation

 

The 
Board of Professional Responsibility therefore RECOMMENDS: 

A.  That Frank J. Jones' Petition for 
Reinstatement, filed May 22, 2002, be GRANTED; and

B.  That Frank J. Jones should pay the costs 
incurred by the Wyoming State Bar for the lodging, travel and meals for the 
Board of Professional Responsibility to conduct the hearing, including the fees 
of the court reporter engaged by the Wyoming State Bar to report the hearing, 
and further that Mr. Jones should pay for all the time devoted to this case by 
Special Bar Counsel, Raymond W. Martin, at Mr. Martin's prevailing hourly 
rate.

 

            
Dated this 17th day of December, 
2003.

 

[¶5]           
We 
do not need to detail the evidence offered on Mr. Jones's behalf which the Board 
relied upon in support of its findings, conclusions, and recommendation.  This Court's own review of the record 
satisfies it that clear and convincing evidence was presented that Mr. Jones has 
been rehabilitated; has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law 
required for admission to practice law in this state; and that Mr. Jones's 
resumption of the practice of law will be neither detrimental to the integrity 
and standing of the bar or the administration of justice nor subversive to the 
public interest.  In particular, 
this Court notes Mr. Jones's own words before the Board:  "I am not bitter.  I have no fight with the Wyoming State 
Bar or any of its members;" "What I did was totally wrong. I've accepted that;" 
"[T]here was a period in my life when I was not an honest individual, I was not 
ethical, and I feel that I have overcome that time period and I have done 
everything possible to overcome that;" "I have made a promise to myself, to 
perhaps the religious aspect of my life, God, I've made it to my family, I'll 
make it to this Board, you will never see conduct from me as was exhibited 
during that time period.  It just 
won't happen;" "I will never, ever bring shame upon myself, my family, the legal 
profession, any member of this Board if you should see fit to reinstate me.  I will hopefully go out and make not 
only myself, my family, but perhaps any of you that should follow the course of 
my conduct somewhat happy, maybe not proud, but satisfied that, yes, we gave him 
a chance and he took it and he did what he promised."

 

[¶6]           
No 
absolute guarantee exists that Mr. Jones will never engage in professional 
misconduct again.  But if such a 
guarantee were required for reinstatement under the rules of the Wyoming State 
Bar and this Court, none could qualify.  
All that this Court can require is clear and convincing evidence of the 
factors enumerated in those rules.  
In accepting the Board's recommendation and in deciding to restore Mr. 
Jones to the practice of law in the State of Wyoming, we are placing upon him 
the burden to match his promises with his conduct.  He must now demonstrate to the public, 
to the members of the state bar, to those witnesses who testified on his behalf, 
to the members of the Board, and to the judiciary of this state that his reform 
is fundamental and genuine, and that our collective trust is not 
misplaced.

 

[¶7]           
As 
part of the Board's recommendation to this Court, the Board recommended that Mr. 
Jones "pay the costs incurred by the Wyoming State Bar for the lodging, travel 
and meals for the Board . . . to conduct the hearing, including the fees of the 
court reporter . . . to report the hearing, and . . . pay for all the time 
devoted to this case by Special Bar Counsel, Raymond W. Martin, at Mr. Martin's 
prevailing hourly rate."  This Court 
accepts that recommendation, as well.

 

[¶8]           
It 
is therefore ORDERED that:

 

            
1.  The Petition of Frank J. 
Jones for Reinstatement to the bar of the State of Wyoming be, and it is hereby, 
granted subject to this Court's receipt from the Board of a statement that Mr. 
Jones has paid the Wyoming State Bar's costs and court reporter fees for the 
hearing and Special Bar Counsel's fees in this matter.

 

            
2.  The Clerk of the Supreme 
Court notify the courts of this state, the Wyoming State Bar, who shall notify 
the members of the Wyoming State Bar, and all other necessary entities that Mr. 
Jones has been reinstated to the practice of law in this 
state.

 

            
3.  This decision be 
published in the Wyoming Reporter and the Pacific 
Reporter.

 

 

[¶9]           
Dated 
this  23rd day of January, 
2004.

 

 

                                                                        
FOR THE COURT:*

                                                                   

                                                                   
  
Michael Golden, Justice

 

 

* 
Chief Justice William U. Hill recused 

 

FOOTNOTES

 

152 P.3d 230, 232 (Colo. PDJ 2002).