Court Opinion

ID: 9399117
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-01 21:06:44.980926+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:24.252029
License: Public Domain

ORIGINAL                                                        06/01/2023

          IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA                                Case Number: PR 23-0071

                                        PR 23-0071
                                                                           FILED
                                                                           JUN O 1 2023
                                                                         Bowen Greenwood
                                                                       Clerk of Supreme Court
IN THE MATTER OF JOSEPH HOWARD,                                           State of Montana

      An Attorney at Law,                                        ORDER

            Respondent

       On January 26, 2023, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) filed a formal
disciplinary complaint with the Commission on Practice (Commission) against Montana
attorney Joseph Howard. The disciplinary complaint may be reviewed by any interested
person in the office of the Clerk of this Court.
       On February 10, 2023, Howard tendered an admission and affidavit of consent
pursuant to Rule 26(B) of the Montana Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement
(MRLDE). Howard acknowledged that the material facts ofthe complaint were true and that
he had violated the Montana Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC) as alleged by ODC.
       After ODC concurred with Howard's tendered admission, the Commission set the
matter for hearing on April 20, 2023. Howard personally appeared at the hearing.
       On May 18, 2023, the Commission submitted to this Court its Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Recomrnendation Re Rule 26 Conditional Admission and Affidavit
of Consent in which it recommended that this Court approve Howard's conditional
admission and enter an order imposing the agreed-upon discipline.
       We agree with the Commission's recommendation. In his conditional admission,
Howard admitted that he accepted appointment by the Office of the State Public Defender to
represent C.W. in a postconviction relief matter on July 21, 2014. A few weeks later,
Howard moved the District Court to vacate the briefing schedule to provide Howard with
more time to review the file. The court granted the motion and ordered that he request a
scheduling or status conference once he had reviewed the file. Although Howard maintains
that he spent a significant amount of time reviewing C.W.'s file and he remained in
communication with his client, he failed to request a scheduling conference or file any other
documents for over four years.
       On November 16, 2018, the District Court entered a Notice for Failure to Prosecute
that gave Howard 60 days to file a document or the case would be dismissed. Howard filed a
Notice on January 14, 2019, that stated his intention to file an Amended Petition by June 1,
2019. Howard filed the Amended Petition and brief in support on May 31, 2019; however,
the State moved to dismiss the Amended Petition on thebasis of "inexcusable delay" and the
court granted the motion on October 30, 2019.
       C.W. appealed the dismissal of his postconviction relief petition. This Court
ultimately reversed the dismissal, determining that the delay in the trial court was due to
Howard's inaction and it was unfair to penalize C.W.
       Howard admitted that, by failing to file an Amended Petition in C.W.'s case for over
four years, he violated M. R. Pro. Cond. 1.3, 3.2, and 8.4(d). He further admitted that by
failing to withdraW from C.W.'s case when he was obligated to do so, he, violated
Mont R. Pro. Cond. 1.16(a)(1) and (b)(7).
       Howard tendered his Conditional Admission and Affidavit of Consent in exchange for
discipline that the Commission recommends be accepted by this Court. Although the
Commission is concerned by Howard's failures in his representation of C.W., the
Commission notes that this is Howard's first disciplinary matter of any kind and the agreed-
upon discipline is consistent with' that given to attorneys in similar cases that have come
before the Commission.
       Based upon the foregoing:
       IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
       1. The Conimission's Recommendation that we accept Howard's Rule 26 tendered
admission is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED.
                                 2
        2. Howard is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for 30 days, commencing July 1,
2023.
        3. Howard shall pay the costs incurred by ODC and the Commission in connection
with this matter.
        4. Howard shall obey all laws and comply with the MRPC. Any violation of the
MRPC, or any federal or state law, will constitute a violation of a court order and may result
in further discipline.
        6. Pursuant to MRLDE 26(D), the Clerk of this Court is directed to file copies of
Howard's Conditional Admission and Affidavit of Consent, together with the Commission's
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendations for Discipline.
        The Clerk of this Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order of Discipline upon
Joseph Howard, and to provide copies to Disciplinary Counsel, the Office Administrator for
the Commission on Practice, the Clerks of all the District Courts of the State of Montana,
each District Court Judge in the State of Montana, the Clerk of the Federal District Court for
the District of Montana, the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit, and
the Executive Director of the State Bar of Montana.
                    , s 4-     -54. h 07_,
      DATED this I — day of-May„ 2023.

                                                                  hief Justice

                                              3
    c_,4     : /j   ..,It4,
                          ,:

    9      ...,:,
                Justices
                           fc'...   .

4