Court Opinion

ID: 9942955
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-22 15:06:49.009214+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:45:25.518297
License: Public Domain

FILED FEBRUARY 9, 2024
                                                CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT
                                                  STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                   IN THE SUPREME COURT
                   STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                  2024 ND 28

In the Matter of the Application for
Disciplinary Action Against David R.
Spencer,a person admitted to the Bar of
the State of North Dakota
      ----------
Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court
of the State of North Dakota,
      v.
David R. Spencer

                                 No. 20240012

Application for disciplinary action

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

Per Curiam.

                                       1
                      Disciplinary Board v. Spencer
                               No. 20240012

Per Curiam

[¶1] The Supreme Court has before it a report from a hearing panel of the
disciplinary board recommending David R. Spencer be suspended from the
practice of law in North Dakota for 90 days, be placed on probation for two-
years following the suspension, and pay $250 in costs and expenses of the
disciplinary proceeding. We adopt the hearing panel’s findings and conclusions
but order a sanction of a 30-day suspension.

[¶2] Spencer was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on September 26,
2014, and he has been licensed since that time.

[¶3] Assistant Disciplinary Counsel filed an affidavit outlining unsuccessful
efforts to serve Spencer. Therefore, service in these matters was made on the
Clerk of the Supreme Court under Admission to Practice R. 1. Spencer failed
to answer the petition and Disciplinary Counsel moved for default. Spencer is
in default and the charges in the petition for discipline are deemed admitted
under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 3.1(E)(2).

[¶4] On January 2, 2024, the hearing panel filed default findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and recommendations for discipline. On January 25, 2023,
Spencer appeared at the Ward County Courthouse to go through security prior
to making an appearance for a change of plea hearing. While going through
security, the court security officer observed the odor of alcohol on Spencer. The
officer’s observation was shared with an Assistant State’s Attorney, who also
personally observed the odor on Spencer. The Assistant State’s Attorney
confronted Spencer and they both agreed to continue the change of plea until
the following day. On January 26, 2023, the same court security officer
observed the odor of alcohol on Spencer and reported it to the State’s Attorney’s
Office. That morning, a different State’s Attorney also observed the odor of
alcohol coming from Spencer. In chambers on January 26, 2023, Spencer was
asked if he wanted to have a test conducted or to sign an affidavit that he was

                                       2
not under the influence, but Spencer declined. The change of plea hearing was
continued to the afternoon of January 26, 2023.

[¶5] The hearing panel concluded Spencer’s conduct violated N.D.R. Prof.
Conduct 8.4 by attempting to violate Rule 1.1 regarding competence by
showing up to represent a client while under the influence of alcohol and
causing the repeated need for the matter to be rescheduled.

[¶6] The hearing panel considered aggravating factors of prior disciplinary
offenses, a pattern of misconduct, and selfish motive. The hearing panel
recommended Spencer be suspended from the practice of law in North Dakota
for 90 days, be placed on probation with conditions for two years following the
suspension, and pay $250 in costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceeding.

[¶7] The hearing panel’s report was served on the Clerk of the Supreme Court
and Disciplinary Counsel on January 8, 2024, and forwarded to the Supreme
Court. Objections were due within 20 days of service of the report. No
objections were received, and the matter was submitted to the Court for
consideration.

[¶8] The Court adopts the hearing panel’s findings and conclusions. It
concludes a 90-day suspension is not an appropriate sanction. Instead, it
orders a 30-day suspension.

[¶9] IT IS ORDERED that as outlined above, the findings of fact, conclusions
of law, and recommendations by the hearing panel are adopted.

[¶10] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that David R. Spencer is SUSPENDED
from the practice of law for 30 days, effective February 12, 2024.

[¶11] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Spencer be placed on probation for a
two-year period following the suspension with the following conditions:

      1. Spencer is required to undergo a mental health evaluation within 30
      days of this order to determine the appropriate course and cost of
      treatment and monitoring by RecoveryTrek, the costs and expenses of
      which are to be paid by Spencer.

                                      3
      2. Spencer continue meeting with a mental health professional at a
      frequency determined by the mental health professional to address any
      mental health and substance abuse issues, the costs and expenses of
      which are to be paid by Spencer.

      3. Spencer attend weekly sobriety support meetings, which will be
      monitored by RecoveryTrek.

      4. Spencer submit quarterly self-monitoring reports to the Office of
      Disciplinary Counsel addressing compliance with the terms of probation.

[¶12] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event of a failure to participate
or comply with the monitoring program, RecoveryTrek is required to report to
the Office of Disciplinary Counsel how Spencer has failed to participate or
comply with the terms of his probation.

[¶13] IT IS FURTHER ORDERD that Spencer is required to participate and
comply with the Lawyer Assistance Program.

[¶14] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Spencer pay the costs and expenses of
these disciplinary proceedings in the amount of $250, payable to the Secretary
of the Disciplinary Board, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Bismarck, North
Dakota 58505-0530, within 30 days of entry of judgment.

[¶15] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Spencer comply with N.D.R. Lawyer
Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice.

[¶16] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that reinstatement is governed by N.D.R.
Lawyer Discipl. 4.5(B).

[¶17] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
      Daniel J. Crothers
      Lisa Fair McEvers
      Jerod E. Tufte
      Douglas A. Bahr

                                      4