Court Opinion

ID: 9785354
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 21:34:33.462072+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:20.241212
License: Public Domain

Parraguirre, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur with the majority’s analysis and conclusions relating to attorney misconduct jurisprudence. I disagree, however, with the scope of sanctions imposed in the Castro and Seasholtz cases.
The district court judges have the benefit of evaluating all conduct during the course of trial, and are in a superior position to determine and impose appropriate sanctions for attorney misconduct. It does not appear from the record that the district court chose to impose sanctions in either case. In fact, it is not clear that sanctions were even requested. Before imposing sanctions of the nature ordered by the majority, I would prefer to have additional information. I, therefore, would order trial counsel to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.