Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller, 335 Conn. 474 (2020)

Citation: Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller, 335 Conn. 474 (2020)
Parent Document: Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller, 335 Conn. 474 (2020)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2020-04-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4801014/office-of-chief-disciplinary-co... ↗

Full Text

1,399 chars

PER CURIAM. In connection with the presentment
         filed by the plaintiff, the Office of Chief Disciplinary
         Counsel, alleging misconduct by the defendant attor-
         ney, Josephine Smalls Miller, the defendant appeals
         from the judgment of the trial court suspending her from
         the practice of law for one year for violating numerous
         provisions in the Rules of Professional Conduct. Fol-
         lowing the trial court’s judgment, the defendant filed a
         motion for articulation, which the trial court denied.
         The defendant filed a motion for review with the Appel-
         late Court, which was granted, but that court denied
         any relief. On appeal, the defendant claims that (1)
         the trial court’s refusal to articulate and the Appellate
         Court’s refusal to order an articulation violate her due
         process rights, (2) the trial court incorrectly concluded
         that she engaged in misconduct sufficient to warrant
         any discipline, including suspension from the practice
         of law, and (3) the trial court incorrectly concluded
            * April 27, 2020, the date that this decision was released as a slip opinion,
         is the operative date for all substantive and procedural purposes.
Page 30                        CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                        November 3, 2020

Other Sections in This Document (122)

Full Text