Opinion ID: 1058577
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Consideration of a De Facto Suspension

Text: Green's final assignment of error is that the Board failed to consider the premature dissemination of information about his suspension in its determination of the sanction. He contends the Board's improper dissemination of information about him violated Part 6, § IV, ¶ 13(N)(4) of the Rules of this Court. The Bar responds that at the January 26, 2007 hearing, Green was afforded the opportunity to present material evidence and argument in mitigation. Additionally, the Bar contends that the Board considered all of the Bar's evidence in aggravation along with Green's evidence in mitigation, before imposing a 45-day suspension. Again, we agree with the Bar. The record reflects that at the January 26, 2007 hearing, Green was afforded a full opportunity to present material evidence and argument in mitigation of any sanction to be imposed upon him by the Board. Green's primary argument at that hearing was based on the language of Part 6, § IV, ¶ 13(N)(4), which prohibits an official of the Bar from communicat[ing] with a member of the media or the public concerning a matter that is confidential. Green argued that there is no way that I could be punished any more than I've been punished for two and a half years . . . and I ask you to take that into consideration. It is evident from the Board's Order that the Board considered the aggravating and mitigating factors, including any de facto suspension, before announcing its decision. This information included the newspaper articles and Bar website information introduced by Green. The Board concluded taking all of that into consideration, it is the unanimous decision of this panel that Mr. Green's license be suspended for 45 days effective July 1, 2007. Green was provided a full and fair opportunity to present evidence in mitigation, and the record supports that the Bar's position that the Board heard and considered that evidence. Based on our independent examination of the whole record, giving the factual findings [of the Board] substantial weight and viewing them as prima facie correct, El-Amin, 257 Va. at 612, 514 S.E.2d at 165 (emphasis omitted), we cannot say that the Board abused its discretion in fixing the period of suspension at 45 days to commence July 1, 2007.