Case Number(s): 09-C-10633
In the Matter of: KENNETH L. GOLDEN, Bar # 250521, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Michael J. Glass, Deputy Trial Counsel
1149 South Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-2299
(213) 765-1254
Bar # 102700,
Counsel for Respondent: James R. Tedford II, Tedford & Associates
301 E. Colorado Blvd., Ste. 514
Pasadena, CA 91101
(626) 793-7270
Bar # 175602,
Submitted to: Settlement Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office Los Angeles.
Filed: Oct 07, 2011.
<<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.
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted August 08, 2007.
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: February 1 in three billing cycles following the effective date of discipline. (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.
Additional aggravating circumstances: .
Additional mitigating circumstances:
Respondent has no prior record of discipline.
Respondent also completed an additional 95 hours of community service, beyond that required as a condition of probation in the underlying criminal matter, by volunteering with the Greater West Hollywood Food Coalition, 1106 N. Cahuenga Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90038. Respondent helped prepare food for the needy, drove the food ruck to the site where the needy are fed, and served food to the needy.
Attachment language (if any): .
IN THE MATTER OF: KENNETH LOUIS GOLDEN, State Bar No. 250521
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 09-C-10633
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent Kenneth L. Golden ("Respondent") admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 09-C-10633 (Conviction 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 February 24, 2011, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code section 236 (False Imprisonment), a misdemeanor; Penal Code section 422 (Criminal Threats), a misdemeanor.
3. On July 1, 2011, the Review Department of the State Bar Court issued an order referring the matter to the Hearing Department on the following issues: for a hearing and decision recommending the discipline to imposed in the event that the hearing department finds that the facts and circumstances surrounding the misdemeanor violations of Penal Code sections 236 (False Imprisonment) and 422 (Criminal Threats), of which Respondent Kenneth Louis Golden was convicted, involved moral turpitude or other misconduct warranting discipline.
FACTS
4. In the underlying matter, on August 22, 2008, Adrian Cortez ("Cortez"), 19 year old stepson of Richard Levinson, ("Levinson") was a passenger in a Prime Time Shuttle Van ("the Van") traveling southbound on Sepulveda, near Century Blvd., near Los Angeles International Airport. Levinson had represented to Respondent that Levinson owned an investment company and had made some business investments for Respondent. The Van came to a stop and Respondent approached the Van. Mr. Cortez called 911. Respondent then yelled several threatening statements at Mr. Cortez, due to Respondent’s disappointment over the failure of Levinson to make investments for Respondent. Los Angeles Police Officer Matthews arrived on the scene. Respondent was released from the scene and left the location. Respondent was subsequently arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department on September 20, 2008.
5. On February 24, 2011, Respondent was sentenced and received a suspended sentence, was placed on 3 years summary probation, ordered to make restitution in the amount of $100.00, pay a $40.00 court security assessment, pay a $30.00 criminal conviction assessment, perform 400 hours of community service not own, use, or possess any dangerous or deadly weapons, and stay away from Adrian Cortez and Richard Levinson.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
6. By being convicted of violating Penal Code section 236 (False Imprisonment), a misdemeanor, and Penal Code section 422 (Criminal Threats), a misdemeanor, Respondent willfully violated a law of this state in violation of Business and Professions Code section 6068(a).
7. Respondent’s conviction for violating Penal Code section 236 (False Imprisonment), a misdemeanor, and Penal Code section 422 (Criminal Threats), a misdemeanor, also constitutes conviction of crimes involving other misconduct warranting discipline.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was September 20, 2011.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 3.4 provides that "Final conviction of a member of a crime which does not involve moral turpitude inherently or in the facts and circumstances surrounding the crime’s commission but which does involve other misconduct warranting discipline shall result in a sanction as prescribed under part B of these standards appropriate to the nature and extent of the misconduct found to have been committed by the member.”
In In re Otto (1989) 48 Cal. 3d 970, Respondent was convicted on felony charges of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury and infliction of corporal punishment on a cohabitant of the opposite sex resulting in a traumatic condition. The trial court reduced both counts to misdemeanors. The acts did not involve moral turpitude. The court imposed discipline consisting of a two year stayed suspension, two years probation with conditions including a six month actual suspension.
In In the Matter of Stewart (Review Dept. 1994) 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 52, Respondent was convicted of misdemeanor battery on a police officer. He drank a 100 proof alcoholic beverage while his 18 month old son was in his sole care, trespassed on his ex-wife’s apartment, refused to leave when officers told him to do so, berated his ex-wife, bear hugged an officer when the officer took hold of Respondent’s arm, and made racial epithets towards one of the officers. The criminal court suspended the sentence, imposed a two year probation on conditions, including two days in jail, attendance at thirty meetings of AA and forty hours of community service. The Review Department recommended discipline consisting of a two year stayed suspension, two years probation with conditions, including a sixty day actual suspension. In mitigation, Respondent had one prior discipline just one year before this misconduct occurred, but it was of a different nature and not imposed until after his criminal conviction so "respondent could not have learned from his prior discipline." In aggravation, Respondent provoked a confrontation with, and resisted the authority of the police. Respondent also lacked insight into the seriousness of his actions.
In the instant case, based on the authority above, Respondent’s misconduct is more egregious than that of the Respondent in Stewart, id., but not as egregious as the Respondent in Otto, supra. As such, discipline consisting of a two year stayed suspension, two years probation with conditions, including a 90 day actual suspension is appropriate.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of September 20, 2011, the prosecution costs in this matter are $2,287.00. 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.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Under standard 1.2(e)(vi), Respondent has provided the State
Bar with letters attesting to Respondent’s good character from the following
persons: Ryan K. Rubin, Attorney (Member of the State Bar of Ohio and State Bar
of Kentucky) who has known Respondent for about 25 years; Steven H. Coven,
Attorney (Member of the State Bar of Ohio) who has known Respondent for about
25 years; Paul Atigapramoj, Attorney (Member of the State Bar of California)
who has known Respondent for about 4 years; and Todd E. Behrens, Attorney
(Member of the State Bar of Ohio) who has known Respondent for about 27 years.
Each of the persons who has provided a letter attesting to Respondent’s good
character is aware of the full extent of Respondent’s misconduct.
Case Number(s): 09-C-10633
In the Matter of: KENNETH LOUIS GOLDEN
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: Kenneth L. Golden
Date: 09/25/2011
Respondent’s Counsel: James R. Tedford II
Date: 09/29/2011
Deputy Trial Counsel: Michael J. Glass
Date: 09/30/2011
Case Number(s): 09-C-10633
In the Matter of: KENNETH LOUIS GOLDEN
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:
<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
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.
1. On page 4 of the stipulation, an ‘X’ is inserted in the box next to paragraph D.(2).
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: RICHARD A. HONN
Date: 10/07/2011
[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 October 07, 2011, 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:
JAMES R TEDFORD II
TEDFORD & ASSOCIATES
301 E COLORADO BLVD STE 514
PASADENA CA 91101
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
MICHAEL GLASS, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on October 07, 2011.
Signed by:
Angela Carpenter
Case Administrator
State Bar Court