State
Bar Court of California
Hearing
Department
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 09-C-10309
In the Matter of: Robert Andrew Karpuk Bar # 93322 a Member
of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel for the State Bar: BRANDON K. TADY, Office of
the Chief Trial Counsel, 1149 South Hill Street, Los Angeles, California 90015,
Bar # 83045
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, ROBERT
ANDREW KARPUK, 1557 Monte Viento Dr., Malibu, California 90265, Bar # 93322
Submitted to: Settlement Judge, State Bar Court Clerk’s
Office Los Angeles
Filed: August 25, 2010
<<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
Note: All information required by this form and
any additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must
be set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings,
e.g., "Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of
Law," "Supporting Authority," etc.
A. Parties' Acknowledgments:
1. Respondent
is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted October 27, 1980.
2. The
parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even if
conclusions of law or disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Court.
3. All
investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption of this
stipulation are entirely resolved by this stipulation and are deemed
consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under
"Dismissals." The stipulation consists of 10 pages, not
including the order.
4. A
statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes
for discipline is included under "Facts."
5. Conclusions
of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also included
under "Conclusions of Law".
6. The
parties must include supporting authority for the recommended level of
discipline under the heading "Supporting Authority."
7. No
more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation, Respondent has been
advised in writing of any pending investigation/proceeding not resolved by this
stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
8. Payment
of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. &
Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one option only):
<<not>>
checked. Until costs are paid in full, Respondent will remain actually
suspended from the practice of law unless relief is obtained per rule 5.130,
Rules of Procedure.
checked.
Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following
membership years: three (3) billing cycles following the effective date of the
Supreme Court Order on this matter.. (Hardship, special circumstances or
other good cause per rule 5.132, Rules of Procedure.) If Respondent fails
to pay any installment as described above, or as may be modified by the State
Bar Court, the remaining balance is due and payable immediately.
<<not>>
checked. Costs are waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment
entitled "Partial Waiver of Costs".
<<not>>
checked. Costs are entirely waived.
B.
Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see
Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)].
Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required.
checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)]
checked.
(a)
State Bar Court case # of prior case 91-O-00850 CEV
checked.
(b)
Date prior discipline effective June 26, 1994
checked.
(c)
Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: California Rules of
Professional Conduct, rule 3-300
<<not>> checked.
(d) Degree of prior
discipline Public Reproval
<<not>> checked.
(e) If Respondent has two
or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below.
<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty: Respondent's
misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment,
overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional
Conduct.
<<not>> checked. (3) Trust Violation: Trust funds or
property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account to the
client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct
toward said funds or property.
<<not>> checked. (4) Harm: Respondent's misconduct
harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice.
<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference: Respondent
demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the
consequences of his or her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of Cooperation: Respondent
displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her misconduct or
to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings.
<<not>> checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct:
Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or
demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are
involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances:
C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts
supporting mitigating circumstances are required.
not>>
checked. (1) No Prior
Discipline: Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years
of practice coupled with present misconduct which is not deemed serious.
not>>
checked. (2) No Harm:
Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the
misconduct.
not>>
checked. (3) Candor/Cooperation:
Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of
his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and
proceedings.
not>>
checked. (4) Remorse:
Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse
and recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone
for any consequences of his/her misconduct.
not>>
checked. (5) Restitution:
Respondent paid $ on in restitution to
without the threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal
proceedings.
not>>
checked. (6) Delay: These
disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed. The delay is not
attributable to Respondent and the delay prejudiced him/her.
not>>
checked. (7) Good Faith:
Respondent acted in good faith.
not>>
checked. (8) Emotional/Physical
Difficulties: At the time of the stipulated act or acts of professional
misconduct Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities
which expert testimony would establish was directly responsible for the
misconduct. The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of any
illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and
Respondent no longer suffers from such difficulties or disabilities.
<<not>>
checked. (9) Severe Financial Stress: At the time of
the misconduct, Respondent suffered from severe financial stress which resulted
from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her
control and which were directly responsible for the misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. (10) Family Problems: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent
suffered extreme difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than
emotional or physical in nature.
<<not>>
checked. (11) Good Character: Respondent's good character is attested to
by a wide range of references in the legal and general communities who are
aware of the full extent of his/her misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. (12) Rehabilitation: Considerable time has passed since the acts
of professional misconduct occurred followed by convincing proof of subsequent
rehabilitation.
checked.
(13) No mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional mitigating circumstances:
D.
Discipline:
checked.
(1) Stayed
Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a period of .
<<not>>
checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar
Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to practice and present learning
and ability in the law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii) Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution as set forth in the
Financial Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>>
checked. iii. and until Respondent does the following: .
checked.
(b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.
checked. (2) Probation: Respondent must be placed on probation
for a period of 1 year, which will commence upon the effective date of the
Supreme Court order in this matter. (See rule 9.18, California Rules of
Court.)
checked. (3) Actual Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law in the State
of California for a period of .
<<not>>
checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar
Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to practice and present learning
and ability in the law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct
<<not>>
checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution as set forth in the
Financial Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>>
checked. iii. and until Respondent does the following: .
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
<<not>>
checked. (1) If Respondent is actually suspended for two years or more, he/she
must remain actually suspended until he/she proves to the State Bar Court
his/her rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the
general law, pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney Sanctions
for Professional Misconduct.
checked.
(2)
During the probation period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the
State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked.
(3)
Within ten (10) days of any change, Respondent must report to the Membership
Records Office of the State Bar and to the Office of Probation of the State Bar
of California ("Office of Probation"), all changes of information,
including current office address and telephone number, or other address for
State Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1 of the Business and
Professions Code.
checked.
(4)
Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of discipline, Respondent must
contact the Office of Probation and schedule a meeting with Respondent's
assigned probation deputy to discuss these terms and conditions of probation.
Upon the direction of the Office of Probation, Respondent must meet with the
probation deputy either in-person or by telephone. During the period of
probation, Respondent must promptly meet with the probation deputy as directed
and upon request.
checked.
(5)
Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on
each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation.
Under penalty of perjury, Respondent must state whether Respondent has complied
with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all conditions
of probation during the preceding calendar quarter. Respondent must also state
whether there are any proceedings pending against him or her in the State Bar
Court and if so, the case number and current status of that proceeding. If the
first report would cover less than 30 days, that report must be submitted on
the next quarter date, and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same information,
is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the period of
probation and no later than the last day of probation.
<<not>>
checked. (6) Respondent must be assigned a probation monitor. Respondent must
promptly review the terms and conditions of probation with the probation
monitor to establish a manner and schedule of compliance. During the period of
probation, Respondent must furnish to the monitor such reports as may be
requested, in addition to the quarterly reports required to be submitted to the
Office of Probation. Respondent must cooperate fully with the probation
monitor.
checked.
(7)
Subject to assertion of applicable privileges, Respondent must answer fully,
promptly and truthfully any inquiries of the Office of Probation and any
probation monitor assigned under these conditions which are directed to
Respondent personally or in writing relating to whether Respondent is complying
or has complied with the probation conditions.
checked.
(8)
Within one (1) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent
must provide to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a
session of the Ethics School, and passage of the test given at the end of that
session.
No Ethics School recommended. Reason: .
checked.
(9)
Respondent must comply with all conditions of probation imposed in the
underlying criminal matter and must so declare under penalty of perjury in
conjunction with any quarterly report to be filed with the Office of Probation.
<<not>>
checked. (10) The following
conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>> checked. Substance
Abuse Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Law Office
Management Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Medical
Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Financial
Conditions.
F. Other Conditions Negotiated by the Parties:
checked.
(1)
Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination: Respondent must
provide proof of passage of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination
("MPRE"), administered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners,
to the Office of Probation during the period of actual suspension or within one
year, whichever period is longer. Failure to pass the MPRE results in
actual suspension without further hearing until passage. But see rule 9.10(b),
California Rules of Court, and rule 5.162(A) & (E), Rules of Procedure.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason: .
checked.
(2)
Rule 9.20, California Rules of Court: Respondent must comply with the
requirements of rule 9.20, California Rules of Court, and perform the acts
specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 30 and 40 calendar
days, respectively, after the effective date of the Supreme Court's Order in
this matter.
<<not>> checked.
(3) Conditional Rule 9.20,
California Rules of Court: If Respondent remains actually suspended for
90 days or more, he/she must comply with the requirements of rule 9.20, California
Rules of Court, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of
that rule within 120 and 130 calendar days, respectively, after the effective
date of the Supreme Court's Order in this matter.
checked.
(4)
Credit for Interim Suspension [conviction referral cases only]:
Respondent will be credited for the period of his/her interim suspension toward
the stipulated period of actual suspension. Date of commencement of interim
suspension:
<<not>> checked.
(5) Other Conditions:
ATTACHMENT
TO
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER
OF: ROBERT ANDREW KARPUK
CASE
NUMBER(S): ET AL. 09-C-10309
FACTS AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent
admits the following facts are true and he is culpable of the violation of the
specified statutes.
Case number:
09-C-10309.
FACTS.
1. On
November 20, 2008, Respondent went to the Fry’s Electronics Store
("Fry’s") located at 1901, East Ventura Blvd., Oxnard, California.
Respondent entered Fry’s and he selected seven (7) CDs which he placed in the
pockets of his walking shorts. Respondent exited Fry’s without paying for the
seven (7) CDs. Respondent was arrested by two of Fry’s loss prevention officers
after he exited the store without
paying for
the seven (7) CDs.
2. On November
20, 2008, Fry’s loss prevention officers called the Oxnard Police Department.
On November 20, 2008, Respondent was placed under arrest by an Oxnard Police
Department officer. On December 16, 2008, the Ventura County District
Attorney’s Office filed a complaint against Respondent charging him with one
count of violating California Penal Code ("Penal Code"), section 484
(a) (petty theft).
3. On August
28, 2009, Respondent pled no contest to, and was found guilty of, one count of
violating Penal Code, section 484 (a), a misdemeanor. The Ventura County
Superior Court sentenced Respondent to 12 months Conditional Revocable Release,
payment of restitution of $99 to Fry’s, and a fine of $100 payable to the State
Restitution Fund.
4. On
February 22, 2010, the Review Department placed Respondent on interim
suspension pending final disposition of the criminal conviction proceeding in
State Bar Court.
CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW.
5.
Respondent’s criminal conviction for violating Penal Code, section 484 (a) is a
misdemeanor crime involving moral turpitude.
6.
Respondent’s conviction of violating Penal Code, section 484 (a) involves the
commission of an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption in
wilful violation of California Business and Professions Code, section 6106.
Attachment
Page 1
PENDING
PROCEEDINGS.
None, The
disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(6), was August 3, 2010.
COSTS OF
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges
that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed Respondent that as of
August 3, 2010, the prosecution costs in this matter are $ $3530. Respondent
further acknowledges that should this stipulation be rejected or should relief
from the stipulation be granted, the costs in this matter may increase due to
the cost of further proceedings.
PROCEDURAL
BACKGROUND IN CONVICTION PROCEEDING.
1. This is a
proceeding pursuant to sections 6101 and 6102 of the Business and Professions
Code and rule 9.10 of the California Rules of Court.
2. On August
28, 2009, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code, section 484 (a), a
misdemeanor.
3. On March
11, 2010, the Review Department of the State Bar Court issued an order
referring the matter to the Hearing Department on the following issues: the
level of discipline to be imposed.
STATE BAR
ETHICS SCHOOL.
Because
Respondent has agreed to attend State Bar Ethics School as part of this
stipulation, Respondent may receive Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit
upon the satisfactory completion of State Bar Ethics School.
AUTHORITIES
SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 3.2
provides that final conviction of a member of a crime involving moral
turpitude, either inherently or in the facts and circumstances surrounding the
crime’s commission shall result in disbarment. Only if the most compelling
mitigating circumstances clearly predominate, shall disbarment not be imposed.
In those latter cases, the discipline shall not be less than two years actual
suspension, prospective to any interim suspension imposed, irrespective of
mitigating circumstances.
In re
Rothrock (1944) 25 Cal. 2d 588. In re Rothrock, 25 Cal. 2d at page 590,
the Supreme Court held that "’In cases such as those involving convictions
of murder, forgery, extortion, bribery, perjury, robbery, embezzlement and
other forms of theft, no difficulty would attend a determination of the
question of moral turpitude from a consideration of the record of conviction
alone.’"
Based on In re
Rothrock, Respondent’s conviction of violating Penal Code, section 484 (a) is a
misdemeanor involving moral turpitude.
In re Morse
(1995) 11 Cal. 4th 184, 209 the Califomia Supreme Court provided an abbreviated
analysis for determining the appropriate level of State Bar discipline. The
Supreme Court stated: "These decisions provide some guidance, but our
determination of the appropriate level of discipline ultimately depends on the
answers to two key questions. First, what did Morse do wrong? Second, what is
the
Attachment
Page 2
discipline
most likely to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession, or
stated conversely, to deter Morse from future wrongdoing?" Here, Respondent
pied no contest and was found guilty of one count of violating Penal Code,
section 484 (a) (petty theft). The stipulated discipline of one (1) year actual
suspension, two (2) years stayed suspension, and three (3) year probation with
conditions is most likely to deter Respondent from future wrongdoing.
9 Attachment
Page 3
SIGNATURE
OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 09-C-10309
In the Matter of: Robert Andrew Karpuk
By their
signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as applicable, signify their
agreement with each of the recitation and each of the terms and conditions of
this Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition.
Signed by:
Respondent: Robert Andrew Karpuk
Date: August
5, 2010
Respondent’s
Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial
Counsel: Brandon K. Tady
Date: August
10, 2010
ACTUAL
SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 09-C-10309
In the Matter of: Robert Andrew Karpuk
Finding the
stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the public,
IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any is GRANTED
without prejudice, and:
checked.
The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE
RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>>
checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set
forth below, and the DISCIPLINE IS RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>>
checked. All Hearing dates are vacated.
The parties
are bound by the stipulation as approved unless: 1) a motion to withdraw or
modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after service of this order, is
granted; or 2) this court modifies or further modifies the approved
stipulation. (See rule 5.58 (E) & (F), Rules of Procedure.) The effective
date of this disposition is the effective date of the Supreme Court order
herein, normally 30 days after the file date. (See rule 9.18(a), California
Rules of Court.)
Signed by:
Judge of the
State Bar Court: Donald F. Miles
Date: August
25, 2010
Actual
Suspension Order
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule
5.27(B); Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case
Administrator of the State Bar Court of California. I am over the age of
eighteen and not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court
practice, in the City and County of Los Angeles on August 25, 2010, I deposited
a true copy of the following document(s):
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DISPOSITION AND ORDER
APPROVING
in a sealed
envelope for collection and mailing on that date as follows:
checked. by first-class mail, with
postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal Service at Los
Angeles, California, addressed as follows:
ROBERT ANDREW KARPUK
1557 MONTE VIENTE DR
MALIBU CA 90265-3061
checked. by interoffice mail through a
facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as
follows:
BRANDON TADY, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby
certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles,
California, on August 25, 2010.
Signed by:
Angela
Carpenter
Case
Administrator
State Bar
Court