Opinion ID: 1162526
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: respondent's professional background

Text: Respondent Harry E. Claiborne officially assumed the duties of United States District Judge for the District of Nevada on September 1, 1978. He was nominated by President Carter to fill a vacancy on the bench in July of that year, and was confirmed by the United States Senate on August 11, 1978. [282] During the appointment process, on August 8, 1978, a hearing was held before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary respecting Mr. Claiborne's qualifications and background. [283] At the start of that hearing, the acting chairman, Senator DeConcini, stated for the record that he had been advised that a substantial majority of the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary of the American Bar Association was of the opinion that Mr. Claiborne was well qualified for appointment to the federal bench. A minority of the Bar Association's committee found him not qualified on the sole ground that Claiborne was, at that time, sixty-one years of age. [284] Thereafter, Senator DeConcini recognized Senators Howard W. Cannon and Paul Laxalt of Nevada who testified on Mr. Claiborne's behalf respecting his character and his qualifications. Specifically, Senator Cannon praised Mr. Claiborne as one of the foremost criminal attorneys in the west and noted that [h]e is known and respected in every courtroom in our state and, by reputation, in many others throughout the United States. In regard to respondent's professional accomplishments, Senator Cannon observed that Mr. Claiborne had distinguished himself not only as an exceptional defense attorney but also as a police officer, an assistant district attorney, a city attorney for North Las Vegas and Henderson, Nevada, and an assemblyman in the Nevada Legislature. [285] In the latter position, Senator Cannon observed that although respondent had served only one term in the Nevada State Assembly, he was elected Assistant Majority Leader and chairman of the Judiciary Committee. And, in that one term he was primarily responsible for passage of legislation placing the question of a probation law on the ballot for statewide consideration. He then campaigned throughout the state to win approval of the measure. When the probation law was approved, he was then appointed to be Nevada's first Director of Probation. [286] Senator Laxalt also praised Mr. Claiborne's nomination to the federal bench testifying in part: The people of the State of Nevada are very, very respectful of this man's abilities not only as a lawyer but as a person who has been heavily engaged in all aspects of community activity in our state. [287] The record of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee proceedings of August 8, 1978, further discloses that in 1974 and 1975 Mr. Claiborne served as a special assistant to the United States Senate Committee on Rules and Administration during the historic hearings on Nelson Rockefeller's nomination to the vice-presidency. [288] At the time of respondent's nomination and confirmation by the United States Senate, the print media throughout this state echoed the testimony of Senators Laxalt and Cannon respecting respondent's background, qualifications, contributions to the legal community, and the high esteem in which he was held by his colleagues. For example, on August 6, 1978, in an editorial entitled: U.S. Judge Claiborne More Than Qualified, the Las Vegas Review-Journal stated that few attorneys can boast the kind of record Harry Claiborne has put together in his 31 years in the state of Nevada. [289] The Review-Journal observed that Mr. Claiborne has a great deal of respect from his peers, and one consistent thing about his character keeps popping up  hard-working. Everyone describes the intense determination he puts into his efforts in a courtroom or while studying his legal papers. [290] Similarly, in an editorial entitled: Claiborne Good Choice, the Reno Evening Gazette stated: Claiborne also has caught the attention and praise of his peers for his charity work. He tops the list of Nevada trial lawyers willing to represent people and organizations without compensation whenever he was impressed by the importance of a case or the gravity of an issue to be defended by an individual or organization unable to pay. [291] (Emphasis added.) The Gazette's observation in this regard is evidenced by the fact that, in 1972, Mr. Claiborne was recognized for supporting and providing legal services to the poor when he received an annual award from the Clark County Legal Services. [292] Moreover, over the years Mr. Claiborne has unselfishly responded to the call of the trial courts of this state whenever they experienced difficulties in finding attorneys to represent an unpopular cause. [293] Further, the Gazette correctly noted that Mr. Claiborne has provided his considerable talents as a defense attorney, without charge, to numerous indigent defendants whose legal problems stirred his compassion. [294] See, e.g., Roy v. State, 87 Nev. 517, 489 P.2d 1158 (1971) (respondent Claiborne successfully prosecuted appeal of mentally retarded defendant employed as a busboy who had been convicted of the offense of selling a lid of marijuana to an undercover police officer who had feigned interest in and friendship for the defendant). The many newspaper articles and editorials appearing throughout the state during this period of time observed that Mr. Claiborne first came to Nevada during World War II as a member of the United States Army Air Corps stationed at what is now known as Nellis Air Force Base. [295] Previously, he was educated at Ouachita Baptist University, and he received his degree in law from Cumberland University in 1941. [296] In 1942, he was admitted to practice in his home state of Arkansas, but, after the war, he remained in Southern Nevada and worked for approximately two years as a police officer in Las Vegas before taking and passing the Nevada Bar Examination in 1946. [297] Later, Mr. Claiborne not only represented many police officers in legal matters without charge, but helped establish the police protective association in Las Vegas and was instrumental in securing the passage of legislation providing for civil service status for policemen and firemen by the Nevada legislature. [298] For the next thirty-one years, as the above-noted articles, editorials, and testimony indicate, he earned the wide respect of his peers, as well as the public-at-large. He was considered a consummate professional dedicated to the practice of law. In 1960, his colleagues in the State Bar of Nevada presented him with an award in recognition of his outstanding service in a criminal case. [299] His colleagues also elected him as president of the Clark County Bar Association in the early 1970's. Additionally, he was named a Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers. [300] Thus, it cannot be questioned that, on September 1, 1978, when Mr. Claiborne officially assumed the duties of United States District Judge, he left behind a well-respected and well-established private practice reflecting thirty-one years of dedication to exemplary legal advocacy. It is equally noteworthy that the conviction giving rise to this proceeding is apparently the only spot on respondent's previously unblemished record. Our review of the record before us, as well as this court's disciplinary files, reveals that the instant proceeding is the only instance in which the question of respondent's ethical fitness to practice law has been submitted to this court. Further, the State Bar has not apprised us of any other disciplinary action against respondent during the course of his career. As a justice of the Illinois Supreme Court observed in a case remarkably similar to this one: This record indicates that this member of our bar, who has given so much to public service, now in his seventieth year, has until this unhappy event enjoyed an excellent reputation  something which cannot be bought or sold in any market place, but is acquired only by cultivation in all phases of human conduct. See In re Walker, 67 Ill.2d 48, 7 Ill.Dec. 89, 92, 364 N.E.2d 76, 79 (1977) (Dooley, J., concurring). In light of this record, we conclude that we would be remiss in our obligations in this disciplinary proceeding if we failed to give careful and thoughtful consideration [to] the evidence of good character and reputation of the Respondent, and his exemplary professional standing... . See State v. Steger, 433 P.2d 225, 227 (Okla. 1966); see also District of Columbia Bar v. Kleindienst, 345 A.2d 146 (D.C. 1975); In re Ford's Case, 102 N.H. 24, 149 A.2d 863, 864 (1959).