Opinion ID: 2273968
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: - - - - - - - - - - - -

Text: What is here is someone  Alston  who has cloaked himself in a name  `para-legal and is conducting himself as an attorney, with all of the rights and privileges which an attorney would have. The following colloquies are instructive: [Alston is the witness.] THE WITNESS: I assisted Mr. Parker in finding out where the legal law library was, for example. There were several of them. I assisted him in looking up certain documents he was looking for in the law library. Certain items that the union had, for example. So I assisted him. That's what I did. [Tr. 25 & 26]     CHAIRMAN: Did you conduct any interviews of Mr. Parker to determine the factual basis for any claims he might have? WITNESS: I'm not going to discuss any of the issues, or any of the things that I did with a client. That's confidential. And that would be work product. You're going into a slippery slope. Again, these issues are before the U. S. Supreme Court. I think this is where I should stop answering those types of questions. [Tr. 26 & 27] [emphasis supplied] Alston has been quoted at length to show the obvious: he wants to file legal papers on behalf of third parties; he wants to participate in Court proceedings on behalf of third parties; he wants to draft legal documents [4] on behalf of third parties; and he wants to file documents with Courts and third parties in a manner that would lead others to believe Alston is authorized and qualified to give legal services. In other words, Alston wants to play lawyer. But he is not licensed to do so and he should be prevented from doing so. Alston's repeated defense to his conduct [5] is: So, what I am suggesting to this tribunal is that what I have been doing has either been sanctioned by two court orders. One from [Federal] Judge Sue Robinson and one from [Federal Judge, now United States Supreme Court Justice] Samuel Alito. That is what I am saying. [Tr. 46-47] Alston was directed to produce copies of the above referenced orders to the Board; he said he would. ODC had no objection. [6] [Tr. 41, 50, 57-58] Nothing related to Judge Robinson's or Justice Alito's orders has been received by the Board, post-Hearing, from Alston.