Opinion ID: 2549606
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Investigation Stage of the Attorney Regulation System

Text: The investigation of allegations against an attorney proceeds as follows. [9] Once ARC makes the determination to investigate an attorney, it provides the attorney in question with written notice of the nature of the allegations. C.R.C.P. 251.10(a). The attorney must respond to the allegations in writing. Following the attorney's response, the case is assigned to an ARC investigator. Id. Once ARC initiates the investigation, the target attorney has a duty to cooperate and participate throughout the investigation. C.R.C.P. 251.5(d); In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24, 28 (Colo.2001). ARC has broad powers to procure evidence during the investigation. See C.R.C.P. 251.10(b)(2). ARC may issue subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses, including the attorney in question, for investigative proceedings. ARC may also issue a subpoena for the production of documents (a subpoena duces tecum) to obtain pertinent books, papers, documents or any other evidence pertinent to the investigation. While ARC's investigative powers are not subject to all of the rules of civil procedure, [10] they are subject to certain discovery rules because of the express incorporation of C.R.C.P. 45. C.R.C.P. 45 allows, among other things, ARC to subpoena documents in the hands of a nonparty so long as it follows the formal requirements of the rule. C.R.C.P. 45(b). Those requirements mandate that the person issuing the subpoena must serve a copy of the subpoena, including a complete list of documents and things requested to be provided pursuant to the subpoena, upon all parties of record. C.R.C.P. 45(c). Rule 45 does not permit a person to subpoena documents by themselves; rather, the items may be sought only in connection with a subpoena for a deposition. [11] 4 Sheila K. Hyatt & Stephen A. Hess, Colorado Civil Rules Annotated § 45.3 (3rd ed.1998). Rule 45 is also subject to Rule 26, which requires that parties receive copies of all documents that are relevant to disputed facts in the proceedings. C.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)(B). Following the specific discovery rules of civil procedure found in Rules 45, 30, and 26, when ARC issues a deposition subpoena for documents, it serves a copy of the subpoena on the attorney under investigation as the party and provides copies of the documents. Such disclosure of documents from ARC to the attorney under investigation is consistent not only with the discovery rules but also with the confidentiality provisions of Rule 251.31, which provide that only the proceedings are confidential. ARC has also historically interpreted the provisions of Rule 251.10(b)(2), and its predecessor Rule 241.10, to require a similar result. Rule 241.10 also incorporated Rule 45 and thus the discovery obligations of the disciplinary investigator have not changed. See C.R.C.P. 241.10. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the predecessor to ARC, always gave the attorney under investigation notice of any investigatory subpoena related to the attorney's case and copies of any documents obtained in the investigative process. The reasons for this practice were fairness and privacy. For example, ARC frequently subpoenas personal, medical, and business records from an attorney during the investigation. Such records implicate the attorney's right of privacy. See People v. Lamb, 732 P.2d 1216, 1220 (Colo.1987); Benson v. People, 703 P.2d 1274, 1280 n. 7 (Colo.1985). As a matter of long-standing procedure and practice, therefore, when ARC issues document subpoenas, it provides notice of the subpoena and copies of the documents to the attorney under investigation. Once the attorney under investigation receives such documents, he or she may use them in various ways. For example, the attorney may review them to determine the strength of the case and whether he or she should offer a conditional admission. C.R.C.P. 251.10(b)(4). A conditional admission occurs when ARC and the attorney under investigation agree upon a conditional admission of misconduct in lieu of a formal complaint when the form of discipline is no greater than a private admonition. Id. Such admissions promote one of the goals of the attorney discipline system: the speedy and informal resolution of minor misconduct. [12] The accused attorney may also disseminate the documents and the information contained within the documents to the public according to the provisions of Rule 251.31(a) and (b). Under Rule 251.31(b), the confidentiality provisions apply only to the proceedings. There is no separate confidentiality provision for investigation documents. The second paragraph of Rule 251.31(a) explicitly allows the attorney under investigation, the complaining witness, and any other witness to the investigative proceedings to disclose the existence of disciplinary proceedings or to disclose any documents or correspondence served on or provided to these persons. C.R.C.P. 251.31(a). Thus, the disciplinary rules explicitly allow the participants in the investigationthe accused attorney, the complaining witness, and any other witnessto disclose the existence of the investigative proceedings and documents before ARC files a formal, public complaint against the accused attorney. [13] The ability of the accused attorney to disclose documents received from ARC is consistent with the goals of the revised attorney discipline system. Before the enactment of our current rules, the accused attorney could not disclose such documents or the existence of grievance proceedings unless permitted to do so by this court. [14] One of the major goals of the amendments was to make the system of attorney discipline more publicly visible. [15] Thus, the confidentiality provisions of the old system were greatly reduced by the new discipline system. The ability of the accused attorneys and witnesses to the investigative proceedings to disclose information if they choose reflects this goal of visibility. The ability of the accused attorney, the complaining witness, or any other witness to disclose information or documents received from ARC during an investigation, however, is not unlimited. To protect the interests of a complainant, witness, third party, or the accused attorney, any person may petition the PDJ for a protective order upon a showing of good cause. C.R.C.P. 251.31(e). Such orders prohibit the disclosure of information otherwise privileged or confidential and direct that the proceedings be conducted so as to implement the order. Id. Rule 251.31(e) is consistent with the power of the court to issue a protective order under C.R.C.P. 26(c), which precludes dissemination of discovery information, upon good cause shown, to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense. Having reviewed the attorney discipline rules and their incorporation of the discovery rules of civil procedure during the investigation stage, we turn to the application of these rules to this case.