Opinion ID: 2039059
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: matter of j.w.

Text: ¶ 24. In early 2001 J.W. retained Attorney Goldstein to represent him in a criminal matter. The matter ultimately went to trial in Milwaukee County Circuit Court, and in May 2001 J.W. was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 14 years in prison. At the sentencing hearing Attorney Goldstein asked J.W. if he wanted to pursue postconviction relief and J.W. responded yes. J.W. and Attorney Goldstein signed the requisite form notifying the court of J.W.'s notice of intent to pursue postconviction relief. However, Attorney Goldstein then failed to file the form. ¶ 25. The referee concluded that by failing to file the Notice of Intent form, Attorney Goldstein failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3. In so holding, the referee noted that such failure was a minimal violation of SCR 20:1.3, stating: I see Goldstein's actions in failing to file the Notice as simple forgetfulness. Goldstein is not the first attorney to forget to file such Notice. His actions caused no harm to the defendant. This was a very minimal violation of SCR 20:1.3.  Id. at 17 (emphasis added). ¶ 26. On appeal, Attorney Goldstein acknowledges that he may have forgotten to file the form, but suggests that it is also possible the error is attributable to the clerk's office. He notes further that J.W. was permitted to proceed with his appeal, such that there was no real prejudice to the client as a result of his oversight. We agree with the referee's conclusion that this was a minimal violation of SCR 20:1.3, but it was a violation nonetheless.