Court Opinion

ID: 9955335
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-28 14:02:19.816158+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:15:34.578880
License: Public Domain

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic
and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of
any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go
to press.

             DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 24-BG-0074

In re WILLIAM ROOSEVELT BUIE, III,

A Member of the Bar of the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Bar Registration No. 471135                               DDN: 2021-D189

BEFORE: Howard and Shanker, Associate Judges, and Thompson, Senior Judge.

                                  ORDER
                            (FILED— March 28, 2024)

      On consideration of the certified order from the state of Maryland suspending
respondent from the practice of law by consent for 180 days, fully stayed in favor of
probation for one year with terms; this court’s February 13, 2024, order directing
respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed;
respondent’s response consenting to reciprocal discipline; and the statement of
Disciplinary Counsel, it is

       ORDERED that William Roosevelt Buie, III, is hereby suspended from the
practice of law for 180 days, fully stayed in favor of one year of probation
conditioned on respondent’s compliance with the remaining probationary terms in
Maryland. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010) (explaining that there
is a rebuttable presumption in favor of imposition of identical discipline and
exceptions to this presumption should be rare).

                                  PER CURIAM