Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Williams

Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

February 22, 2017

In the Matter of Verbelle Bernadette Williams, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Verbelle Bernadette Williams, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2507689)

         MOTION by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District to strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), based upon her conviction of a felony. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on February 3, 1993.

          Mitchell T. Borkowsky, Hauppauge, NY (Carolyn Mazzu Genovesi of counsel), for petitioner.

          Verbelle Bernadette Williams, Baldwin, NY, respondent pro se.

          RANDALL T. ENG, P.J., REINALDO E. RIVERA, MARK C. DILLON, RUTH C. BALKIN, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.

          OPINION & ORDER

          PER CURIAM.

         On April 11, 2011, the respondent pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York to two counts of bank fraud, in violation of 18 USC § 1344, and one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud, in violation of 18 USC §§ 1344 and 1349, all federal felonies. On November 4, 2015, the respondent was sentenced by United States District Court Judge Shira A. Scheindlin to a period of probation of two years, and was directed, inter alia, to pay a $300 assessment.

         By letter dated November 23, 2015, which was received by this Court on January 5, 2016, the respondent notified this Court of her conviction.

         The Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District now moves to strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), based upon her conviction of a felony. In response, the respondent has submitted an affirmation, wherein she states that she has no objection to the Grievance Committee's motion.

         As stated by the Court of Appeals in Matter of Margiotta (60 N.Y.2d 147, 150):

"The Judiciary Law provides for automatic disbarment when an attorney is convicted of a felony. Under this section, an offense committed in any other State, district or territory of the United States where it is classified as a felony is determined to be a felony when it would constitute a felony in this state.' (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 4, par e.) For purposes of this determination, the felony in the other jurisdiction need not be a mirror image of the New York felony, precisely corresponding in every detail, but it must have essential similarity."

         The federal felony of bank fraud has been held to be essentially similar to the New York felonies of grand larceny in the second degree, in violation of Penal Law § 155.40, a class C felony, and scheme to defraud in the first degree, in violation of Penal Law § 190.65, a class E felony (see Matter of Abakporo, 130 A.D.3d 24; Matter of Berkowsky, 127 A.D.3d 175; Matter of Turner, 121 A.D.3d 313).

         By virtue of her federal felony conviction, the respondent was automatically disbarred and ceased to be an attorney pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(a).

         Accordingly, the Grievance Committee's motion to strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), is granted to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.