|
ATTORNEY disciplinary
proceeding. Attorney's license
revoked.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a
stipulation filed pursuant to SCR 22.12 by
the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and
Attorney Joseph M. Engl. In the
stipulation, Attorney Engl agrees that he
committed two acts of professional
misconduct, including engaging in crimes
that reflect adversely on his honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in
other respects. He also agrees that the
revocation of his license to practice law in
Wisconsin is a proper level of discipline
for his misconduct. There is no request in
this matter for a restitution award nor is
there a request in the stipulation for the
imposition of costs against Attorney Engl.
¶2 After fully reviewing the matter, we
approve the stipulation and revoke Attorney
Engl's license to practice law in this
state. The crimes and professional
misconduct committed by Attorney Engl are
disturbing and, given the prior discipline
he received for similar conduct, support his
removal from the practice of law. Because
this matter is being resolved without the
appointment of a referee, we do not impose
any costs on Attorney Engl.
¶3 Attorney Engl was admitted to the
practice of law in Wisconsin in May 2002.
He previously maintained a law practice in
Manitowoc. The most recent address he
provided to the State Bar was in Sheboygan.
|
|
¶4 Attorney Engl has been the subject
of public discipline on one prior occasion.
In 2005 this court accepted an SCR 22.12
stipulation that Attorney Engl reached with
the OLR and publicly reprimanded him. In
re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Engl,
2005
WI 102, 283 Wis. 2d 140, 698 N.W.2d 821.
The misconduct at issue in that proceeding
was Attorney Engl's conviction for one count
of using a computer to facilitate a child
sex crime. Specifically, while working at a
law firm, Attorney Engl used his computer to
enter an Internet chat room and to
communicate his interest in having sexual
intercourse with an individual he believed
to be a 14-year-old girl, but who was
actually a police detective posing as a
teenage girl. When Attorney Engl
subsequently went to the location where he
had arranged to meet the girl, he was
arrested by the police.
|
|
¶5 As in the prior disciplinary
proceeding, in the current matter Attorney
Engl has entered into a stipulation with the
OLR pursuant to SCR 22.12. In the
stipulation, Attorney Engl agrees that the
factual allegations in the OLR's complaint
are accurate and that he committed the
professional misconduct charged in that
complaint. He further agrees with the OLR's
request that the appropriate discipline for
his misconduct is the revocation of his
license to practice law in Wisconsin.
¶6 The stipulation states that Attorney
Engl fully understands the nature of the
misconduct allegations against him, his
right to contest those allegations, and the
ramifications that would follow from this
court's imposition of the stipulated level
of discipline. It also states that Attorney
Engl understands his right to consult with
counsel. Finally, in the stipulation
Attorney Engl verifies that he is entering
the stipulation knowingly and voluntarily
and that his entry into the stipulation
represents his decision not to contest this
matter.
¶7 The complaint to which Attorney Engl
stipulated addresses two matters. The first
matter is similar to the conduct that
resulted in the 2005 public reprimand.
According to the criminal complaint filed
against him, Attorney Engl engaged in e-mail
communication with a female, who explicitly
informed him that she was 15 years old.
Their communications included discussions
about meeting in person for the purpose of
having sexual intercourse. On November 19,
2011, Attorney Engl drove to the girl's
workplace and picked her up. Attorney Engl
engaged in sexual contact with the girl and
had her perform oral sex on him.
¶8 In March 2012 the State charged
Attorney Engl with six felonies. State v.
Engl, Manitowoc County Case No.
2012CF108. Ultimately, in October 2012,
Attorney Engl pled no contest to two
felonies: child enticement-sexual contact
and sexual assault of a child under 16 years
of age. The remaining four felony charges
were dismissed upon the prosecutor's motion
and read in for sentencing purposes. The
circuit court accepted Attorney Engl's
pleas. The court sentenced him on the child
enticement-sexual contact count to three
years of initial confinement and three years
of extended supervision. On the sexual
assault of a child count, the circuit court
imposed and stayed a sentence of an
additional four years of initial confinement
and five years of extended supervision and
placed Attorney Engl on probation for a
period of six years, which was to run
consecutive to the six-year sentence imposed
on the child enticement-sexual contact count.
|
|
¶9 On the basis of these facts, the
parties stipulated that Attorney Engl's
convictions of the two felonies constituted
violations of SCR 20:8.4(b).
¶10 The second matter relates to
Attorney Engl's representation of K.W. and
R.W., who retained Attorney Engl to
represent them in a bankruptcy proceeding.
K.W. and R.W. gave Attorney Engl advance
fees that totaled $2,300, which he was
obligated to hold in trust until earned.
Because Attorney Engl did not maintain a
client trust account at the time he received
these advance fees, he gave them to an
attorney with whom he shared office space,
who placed the funds into that attorney's
client trust account. Attorney Engl did not
have any formal professional association
with the attorney whose trust account
contained K.W. and R.W.'s funds.
¶11 After K.W. and R.W. learned of the
felony charges against Attorney Engl, they
concluded that he would be unable to
represent them in their bankruptcy and
requested a full refund of the advance fees
they had paid to him. K.W. and R.W. did
ultimately receive a full refund of their
money.
|
|
¶12 Attorney Engl's handling of K.W. and
R.W.'s advance fees supports a second count
of misconduct. By failing to maintain his
own trust account and instead placing the
clients' advance fees into a trust account
that he neither owned nor controlled,
thereby placing the funds at risk of being
improperly used by a third party with whom
he had no recognized professional
association, Attorney Engl violated SCR
20:1.15(b)(1) and (4).
¶13 Having considered this matter, we
approve the stipulation and adopt the
stipulated facts and legal conclusions of
professional misconduct. Given the
seriousness of the felony criminal
convictions that underlie Count One of the
OLR's complaint in this matter and the fact
that Attorney Engl was previously
disciplined for a similar criminal
conviction, we agree that the revocation of
his license to practice law in this state is
an appropriate level of discipline. Because
K.W. and R.W. ultimately received a full
refund of their advance fees, we do not
impose any restitution. Finally, because
Attorney Engl entered into a comprehensive
stipulation under SCR 22.12, thereby
obviating the need for the appointment of a
referee and a full disciplinary proceeding,
we do not impose costs in this matter.
¶14 IT IS ORDERED that the license of
Joseph M. Engl to practice law in Wisconsin
is revoked, effective the date of this order.
¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Joseph M.
Engl shall comply with the provisions of SCR
22.26 concerning the duties of a person
whose license to practice law in Wisconsin
has been revoked.
|