Mass.Gov home  home get things done agencies Search Mass.Gov

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Public Reprimand No. 2006-2


Order (public reprimand) entered by the Board April 6, 2006.


At about 2:00 a.m. on December 21, 2004, the Williamstown police were called to the Purple Pub due to a disturbance caused by the respondent, who had been patronizing the pub. The respondent was walking away from the pub when an officer approached him to ask him some questions. The respondent was extremely intoxicated. When the officer insisted on detaining him, the respondent became combative, flailing his arms and informing the officer that he was an assistant district attorney. The officer told the respondent that he was under arrest. The respondent replied, ďNo, Iím not,Ē and shoved the officer in the chest. Three officers took custody of the respondent and transported him to the police station. The respondentís combative behavior continued at the police station, where he kept putting his personal items back in his pockets, attempted to leave, and shoved an officer in the chest.

On May 13, 2005, the respondent admitted to sufficient facts in the North Adams District Court to the misdemeanor crimes of disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, and two counts of assault and battery on a police officer. The case was continued without a finding until November 13, 2006, with conditions that the respondent use no drugs and consume no alcohol, submit to random screens, continue counseling, and write a letter of apology to the Williamstown police department.

Bar counsel filed a petition for discipline on June 22, 2005, alleging the fact of the convictions and that the respondentís conduct had violated Mass. Rules of Prof. C. 8.4(b) and (h). On February 8, 2006, the respondent filed an amended answer admitting to the allegations of the petition for discipline and to violating the cited rules of professional conduct. The respondent and bar counsel stipulated that, in mitigation, the respondent had a long history of psychological problems compounded by substance abuse, that he had abstained from alcohol and had been under the care of a psychiatrist since his arrest, and that he was to undergo an evaluation by Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers and follow the recommended treatment program. In addition, the respondent had been an assistant district attorney for only a little over a month by the time of his arrest, and, due to illness, had not carried out any of the duties of his position. The respondent had not practiced law since his arrest in December 20004. The respondent and bar counsel jointly requested that the respondent be publicly reprimanded for his conduct.

On March 20, 2006, the Board of Bar Overseers voted to accept the partiesí stipulation and impose a public reprimand.

1 Compiled by the Board of Bar Overseers based on the record of proceedings before the Board.

BBO/OBC Privacy Policy. Please direct all questions to
© 2006. Board of Bar Overseers. Office of Bar Counsel. All rights reserved.