|
ATTORNEY reinstatement
proceeding. Reinstatement granted upon
conditions.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a report
filed by referee James J. Winiarski
recommending that the court reinstate, with
conditions, the license of Stephen M.
Compton to practice law in Wisconsin. After
careful review of the matter, we agree that
Attorney Compton's license should be
reinstated and that conditions should be
placed upon his resumption of the practice
of law. We also agree with the referee that
Attorney Compton should be required to pay
the costs of this reinstatement proceeding,
which are $4,373.03 as of March 11, 2013.
|
|
¶2 Attorney Compton was admitted to
practice law in Wisconsin in 1992. He
resides in Waukesha County. In 2002, he was
publicly reprimanded for falsely recording
the time he worked on a contingency fee
case. Public Reprimand of Stephen M.
Compton, No. 2002-6. In 2008, Attorney
Compton's license to practice law was
suspended for 60 days for misconduct related
to failing to supervise an inmate performing
legal work for him and falsely billing the
state public defender for work performed by
that inmate. In re Disciplinary
Proceedings
Against Compton, 2008 WI 3, 306 Wis. 2d
280,
744 N.W.2d 78.
¶3 In 2009, Attorney Compton was
charged with felony criminal conduct in
Walworth County. He was ultimately
convicted of possession of narcotic drugs
(heroin), a Class I felony, and felony bail
jumping, a Class H felony. Two additional
misdemeanor criminal charges for possession
of cocaine and possession of drug
paraphernalia were dismissed but read in.
¶4 On March 3, 2010, the Office of
Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a motion
seeking the summary suspension of Attorney
Compton's law license based on the criminal
convictions. Attorney Compton did not
contest the motion, and this court summarily
suspended his law license on March 16, 2010.
|
|
¶5 In May of 2010, the OLR filed a
disciplinary complaint alleging Attorney
Compton's criminal conduct and seeking a two-
year license suspension. Attorney Compton
stipulated to the facts, misconduct, and
sanction. On September 8, 2010, this court
suspended Attorney Compton's law license for
a period of two years, retroactive to March
16, 2010, the date of the summary
suspension. In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Compton, 2010 WI 112,
329 Wis. 2d 318, 787 N.W.2d 831.
¶6 Attorney Compton filed a petition
for the reinstatement of his law license on
March 12, 2012. The OLR filed its response
to the petition for reinstatement on
November 2, 2012, and did not oppose the
petition. A public hearing on the
reinstatement petition was held on December
18, 2012. The referee filed his report and
recommendation on February 19, 2013.
|
|
¶7 Supreme Court Rule 22.31(1) provides
the standards to be met for reinstatement.
Specifically, the petitioner must show by
clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence
that he or she has the moral character to
practice law, that his or her resumption of
the practice of law will not be detrimental
to the administration of justice or
subversive of the public interest, and that
he or she has complied with SCR 22.26 and
the terms of the order of suspension. In
addition to these requirements, SCRs 22.29(4)
(a)-(4m) provide additional requirements
that a petition for reinstatement must
show. All of these additional requirements
are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31
(1).
|
|
¶8 When we review a referee's report
and recommendation, we will adopt the
referee's findings of fact unless they are
clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are
reviewed de novo. See In re
Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14,
¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747.
¶9 We conclude the referee's findings
support a determination that Attorney
Compton has met his burden to establish by
clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence
that he has met all of the standards
required for reinstatement.
¶10 The referee noted that during the
term of his suspension, Attorney Compton has
not practiced law and has worked primarily
as a landscaper. The referee found that
Attorney Compton has fully complied with the
terms of the order of suspension and that he
was not required to make any restitution or
settle any claims caused by his misconduct.
The referee found that Attorney Compton has
maintained competence and learning in the
law by attending various educational
activities. The referee also found that
Attorney Compton's conduct since the time of
the suspension has been exemplary and above
reproach.
¶11 The referee found that Attorney
Compton has a proper understanding of and
attitude toward the standards that are
imposed upon members of the bar and will act
in conformity with those standards. The
referee found that Attorney Compton can
safely be recommended to the legal
profession, the courts, and the public as a
person fit to be consulted by others and to
represent them and otherwise act in matters
of trust and confidence and in general to
aid in the administration of justice as a
member of the bar and as an officer of the
courts. The referee noted that if his
license to practice law is reinstated,
Attorney Compton intends to engage in the
general practice of law, probably as a sole
practitioner.
¶12 The referee found that, according to
statements Attorney Compton made to Walworth
County sheriff's deputies at the time of his
2009 arrest, Attorney Compton began using
illegal drugs around 2006, and he admitted
being "coked up" while handling legal cases
in court. The referee noted that Deputy
Sergeant Patek of the Walworth County
Sheriff's Department testified at the
reinstatement hearing that Attorney
Compton's conduct before his arrest included
possession and delivery of both heroin and
cocaine. Deputy Sheriff Long of the
Walworth County Sheriff's Department
testified that Attorney Compton's conduct
before his arrest had a major impact on a
woman who was a significant person in
Attorney Compton's life, and the woman
ultimately lost her teaching license as a
result of drug conduct and her relationship
with Attorney Compton. Deputy Sheriff Long
described Attorney Compton as a "great
person" and "a very smart attorney."
¶13 The referee noted that Linda Albert,
manager of the Wisconsin Lawyers Assistance
Program (WisLAP) worked with Attorney
Compton beginning on October 26, 2009, when
he initially volunteered for one year of
monitoring following his arrest. Attorney
Compton subsequently volunteered for an
additional four years of monitoring. Ms.
Albert testified that Attorney Compton,
without hesitation, has provided access to
all of his treatment providers, probation
officers, and the OLR, and that he has
demonstrated honesty and integrity
throughout the monitoring process. Ms.
Albert opined that Attorney Compton has done
an exemplary job of fulfilling his
monitoring contract and has excelled in
consistently meeting the conditions set for
him.
¶14 Ms. Albert testified Attorney
Compton has a low risk of relapsing given
the extended period of time he has been free
of drugs and alcohol. Ms. Albert opined
that Attorney Compton is "no longer impaired
by his disease and is fit to practice." She
recommended that Attorney Compton complete
his contract for five years of monitoring,
which is scheduled to end on October 1,
2014. Ms. Albert testified that after five
years of being alcohol and drug free, a
person's relapse rate statistically is
approximately 14 percent, and she said that
rate does not significantly drop with longer
abstinence.
¶15 Ms. Albert testified she could not
think of a single additional thing Attorney
Compton could have done during his
monitoring to help with his rehabilitation,
and she said he did everything he was asked
to do and there were no failures on his part
during his monitoring. While Ms. Albert
does not believe Attorney Compton requires
monitoring beyond October 1, 2014, she
agrees that if he is reinstated, the public
would be better protected if his monitoring
were to continue past that date.
¶16 The referee noted that Attorney
Compton successfully completed residential
treatment at a hospital. He has
successfully passed all required random drug
and alcohol tests, completed all required
contacts with his monitor, and completed and
documented all required community support
groups and outpatient treatment. The
referee also noted that as of December 18,
2012, Attorney Compton successfully met all
requirements to be discharged from probation
which resulted from his criminal convictions.
¶17 The referee noted that since the
time of his arrest, Attorney Compton lost
his marriage, became estranged from his
children for a period of time, lost the
trust and confidence of the lawyers he used
to work with, went through bankruptcy, and
lost substantial investments and assets.
The referee noted that several lawyers who
testified at the hearing on the
reinstatement petition said they watched
Attorney Compton lose everything that was
important to him and that he hit "the very
bottom." However, those lawyers also said
they have watched Attorney Compton slowly
recover and reestablish strong relationships
with his children and his community. Those
lawyers believe Attorney Compton's journey
through rehabilitation has been remarkable
and that he is again fit to practice law.
¶18 Both Deputy Sergeant Patek and
Deputy Sheriff Long recognize Attorney
Compton's successful rehabilitation to date,
but both men believe the period of Attorney
Compton's suspension has not been
sufficient, given the seriousness of his
criminal conduct. Both believe that more
time is needed before Attorney Compton is
reinstated to the practice of law.
¶19 While the referee said the
seriousness of Attorney Compton's conduct
cannot be overstated, the referee concluded
that since his 2009 arrest, Attorney Compton
has done everything conceivable to turn his
life around and begin the life-long process
of rehabilitation. The referee explained:
Compton has not undertaken the long
and
arduous rehabilitation process for purposes
of fooling the system into giving back his
license, but rather with the determined goal
of truthfully turning his life around and
again becoming a productive and meaningful
member of society. . . .
Compton willingly accepted all
treatment,
suggestions[,] and monitoring. He has
genuinely impressed every individual he has
worked with during his years of monitoring
and rehabilitation. . . .
My personal observations during the
course
of the hearing concur with the observations
of everybody who has worked with Compton
since 2009. Compton is a man humbled by his
great and numerous errors. For a while, he
lost everything that meant anything to him
in his life. I am quite satisfied that
Compton is most sincere in his efforts to
rehabilitate himself. I believe Compton
recognizes that even if he never practiced
law again, he would make the same efforts
toward rehabilitation that he has made since
2009.
The record shows that Compton never
tried to
avoid, evade[,] or blame others for his
inappropriate conduct. He does not lie
about or cover up what he did. His approach
has been to "bare his soul," ask for help,
and do whatever it takes to turn his life
around.
I specifically asked Linda Albert of
WisLAP
whether there was anything Compton failed to
do or anything more he could have done as
part of his monitoring program. Linda
Albert was quick to reply that there was
nothing more the monitoring program could
ask of Compton that he has not already
done. Simply put, Compton's sincere efforts
at rehabilitation have been outstanding and
above question.
¶20 In spite of Attorney Compton's
remarkable efforts to turn his life around,
the referee did express some concern about
the possibility of relapse. Although Ms.
Albert put the risk of a relapse at
approximately 14 percent for someone who has
been free of drugs and alcohol for five
years, the referee said when it comes to
trusting a lawyer to serve the public and
the legal profession, a 14 percent relapse
rate still needs to be addressed. For that
reason, the referee recommends that Attorney
Compton remain under close monitoring,
similar to his current WisLAP monitoring,
for a minimum of two years from the date of
his reinstatement. The referee said
extending the monitoring deadline beyond the
October 1, 2014 expiration of his current
WisLAP monitoring agreement will not only
provide further support for Attorney
Compton, but will also allow a quicker
response to any relapse.
¶21 In response to the concerns of the
two sheriff's deputies that Attorney
Compton's term of suspension has been
insufficient given his criminal convictions,
the referee pointed out that this court saw
fit to suspend Attorney Compton's license
for a period of two years. The referee said
during that two-year period, Attorney
Compton has done everything possible to
rehabilitate himself; he appears
rehabilitated; and expert testimony shows
there is very little more that can be done
for him. The referee said to deny
reinstatement on the basis that a two-year
suspension was not long enough would be
second guessing this court's choice of the
appropriate period of suspension and would
also be ignoring Attorney Compton's nearly
perfect record at rehabilitation up to this
time.
¶22 This court has carefully evaluated
whether Attorney Compton has indeed met the
requirements for the reinstatement of his
license to practice law in Wisconsin, and we
conclude that he has. The behavior that led
to his 2010 suspension was very serious.
However, Attorney Compton acknowledged the
wrongfulness of his conduct, voluntarily
entered into a rehabilitation program, and,
according to everyone who testified at the
hearing on the reinstatement petition, he
has in fact turned his life around and is
ready to resume the practice of law. We
agree with the referee that Attorney Compton
has met his burden of proof with respect to
all elements needed to justify his
reinstatement. We stress that we expect the
exemplary behavior which Attorney Compton
has exhibited during the period of his
suspension to continue once he resumes the
practice of law.
|
|
¶23 We share the referee's concern about
making every reasonable effort to ensure
that Attorney Compton does not relapse. For
that reason we agree with the referee that
Attorney Compton should continue to
participate in a monitoring program for a
period of two years from the date of his
reinstatement. We also agree with the
referee that Attorney Compton should pay the
full costs of this proceeding.
¶24 IT IS ORDERED that the license of
Stephen M. Compton to practice law in
Wisconsin is reinstated effective the date
of this order.
¶25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as a
condition of the reinstatement of his
license to practice law in Wisconsin,
Stephen M. Compton shall continue to
participate in a WisLAP monitoring program
and he shall comply with all conditions
imposed as part of that program for a period
of two years from the date of this order.
¶26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60
days of the date of this order, Stephen M.
Compton shall pay to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation the costs of this proceeding,
which are $4,373.03.
¶27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
compliance with all of the terms of this
order remains a condition of Stephen M.
Compton's license to practice law in
Wisconsin.
|