SC94727 The Florida Bar V. David Carlton Arnold

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Supreme Court » 2000 » SC94727 The Florida Bar V. David Carlton Arnold

State: Florida

Court: Supreme Court

Docket No: sc94727

Case Date: 08/24/2000

Plaintiff: SC94727 The Florida Bar

Defendant: David Carlton Arnold

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
No. SC94727
THE FLORIDA BAR,
Complainant,
vs.
DAVID CARLTON ARNOLD,
Respondent.
[August 24, 2000]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the complaint of The Florida Bar and the referee’s report
regarding alleged ethical breaches by David Carlton Arnold.  The Florida Bar
petitions for review, challenging the referee’s recommended discipline.  We have
jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.  For the reasons stated, we approve the
referee’s findings of fact and recommended discipline.
In March 1993, Arnold was convicted in federal court of various charges,
including three counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a) (1986), and sentenced to
federal prison.  Pursuant to rule 3-7.2(d) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,

the Bar filed a notice of determination of guilt, and Arnold was suspended by this
Court pursuant to rule 3-7.2(e), effective July 19, 1993.  On July 25, 1997, Arnold’s
convictions were reversed and the case remanded for a new trial because of
prosecutorial misconduct involving a Brady1 violation.  See United States v.
Arnold, 117 F.3d 1308 (11th Cir. 1997).  Arnold was released from prison after
having served fifty-three months.
Subsequently, Arnold sent a letter notifying the Bar that his conviction had
been vacated and requesting that his suspension be terminated.  Arnold enclosed a
copy of the opinion reversing his conviction.  Arnold also stated that by separate
cover he was filing “petitions for removal of both dues and CLE delinquency,”2
having fully paid and completed the required continuing legal education credit
hours.  By letter dated September 16, 1997, the Miami office of the Bar notified
Arnold that, pursuant to a stipulation signed in July 1993, the suspension would
continue until the final disposition of the criminal case.  Arnold then received
another letter from the Tallahassee office of the Bar dated January 5, 1998, stating
that he had been reinstated effective December 1997 as a member in good standing
1Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
2Although Arnold characterized his letter as a “petition for removal” of CLE and dues delinquency,
rule 1-3.7(b) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar characterizes such a petition as one for reinstatement.
-2-

with the approval of the Board of Governors.  Based on the letter, Arnold again
started practicing law.
On March 26, 1998, Arnold entered a plea of guilty to a violation of 18
U.S.C. 1957(a) (1986),3 which was Count II of the original indictment filed.  The
other counts were dismissed.  Arnold was adjudicated guilty and sentenced to time
served.  On April 6, 1998, Arnold notified the Bar of the March 26, 1998,
conviction.  On November 12, 1998, the Bar notified Arnold that his reinstatement
was an administrative error and that he was still suspended, but the Bar would not
hold him accountable for practicing law to November 1998 because of its error.
On January 20, 1999, the Bar filed a complaint against Arnold based on the March
1998 conviction.
A referee was appointed and a hearing was held.  The referee found that
Arnold’s violation of section 1957(a) stemmed from his representation of a client in
connection with the purchase and sale of a sailboat.  The referee found that in 1985
Arnold had made three $9,000 cash payments on behalf of his client to Argonaut
318 U.S.C. §1957 (1986) provides:
Engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity
(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances set forth in subsection (d), knowingly
engages or attempts to engage in a monetary transaction in criminally derived property that
is of a value greater than $10,000 and is derived from specified unlawful activity, shall be
punished as provided in subsection (b).
-3-

Yacht Sales toward the purchase of a sailboat.  In 1986, the client left the boat with
Argonaut to be sold.  After selling the boat, Argonaut sent the proceeds of the sale
to Arnold on November 11, 1986, two weeks after the enactment of section
1957(a).  Arnold then deposited the check into his trust account, retained his
attorney fees, and disbursed the balance to his client’s account in the Philippines.
The referee concluded that Arnold’s plea of guilty to a violation of section 1957(a)
was an admission that Arnold knew or deliberately avoided learning that which was
readily apparent-that some of the proceeds that were used to purchase the sailboat
in 1985 were derived from marijuana smuggling activities.  The referee found
Arnold guilty of violating rule 3-4.3 (Misconduct and Minor Misconduct) of the
Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.  The referee recommended that Arnold be found
not guilty of violating rules 3-4.4 (Criminal Misconduct) and 4-8.4(b) (Misconduct).
In mitigation, the referee found:                                                        (1) Arnold had no prior disciplinary record;
(2) there was an absence of dishonest or selfish motive; (3) no injury to clients
resulted; (4) Arnold had a cooperative attitude during the proceedings; (5) credible
character witnesses testified on Arnold’s behalf; (6) the Bar caused unreasonable
delay that prejudiced Arnold; (7) Arnold demonstrated interim rehabilitation; (8)
Arnold has had other sanctions and penalties imposed in the way of incarceration
and depletion of financial resources; (9) the underlying offense was remote in time;
-4-

(10) the sentencing judge felt sympathetic toward Arnold; (11) there was
government misconduct in the underlying case; and (12) Arnold dedicated a large
part of his life to public service.
The referee recommended that Arnold be suspended for sixty days, nunc
pro tunc to July 19, 1993, with automatic reinstatement.  The Bar does not contest
the referee’s findings of fact but argues that a three-year suspension is the
appropriate discipline based on Arnold’s felony conviction.
As to attorney discipline, it is ultimately this Court's task to determine the
appropriate sanction.   See Florida Bar v. Anderson, 538 So. 2d 852, 854
(Fla.1989).  Under Florida Standard for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 5.11,
disbarment is appropriate when an attorney is "convicted of a felony under
applicable law."  The burden is on the attorney to overcome the presumption of
disbarment.  See Florida Bar v. Grief, 701 So. 2d 555, 557 (Fla.1997).  We find
that Arnold has met that burden in this case.
We expressly do not condone Arnold’s activities that led to his conviction
and incarceration nor do we diminish our stringent requirement that every attorney
abide by the law and our strict enforcement of harsh discipline for felony
convictions.  We find here, however, that Arnold was in fact suspended from July
1993 to December 1997, and then again from November 1998 until the present,
-5-

resulting in a total suspension in excess of five years.  These periods of past
suspension for this same conduct together with the extensive mitigation found to
exist by the referee provide a basis for us to approve the referee’s recommended
discipline.
Accordingly, David Carlton Arnold is hereby suspended from the practice of
law in Florida for sixty days, nunc pro tunc to July 19, 1993.  Judgment is entered
for The Florida Bar, 650 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399, for
recovery of costs from David Carlton Arnold in the amount of $1,065.01, for
which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and
QUINCE, JJ., concur.
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SUSPENSION.
Original Proceeding - The Florida Bar
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, and John Anthony Boggs, Staff
Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida, and William Mulligan, Bar Counsel, Miami, Florida,
for Complainant
Jerome H. Shevin, Miami, Florida, and David C. Arnold, pro se, Miami, Florida,
-6-

for Respondent
-7-

Download sc94727.pdf