Hopfl, Matter of
| Decision Date | 29 November 1979 |
| Citation | 48 N.Y.2d 859,424 N.Y.S.2d 350,400 N.E.2d 292 |
| Parties | , 400 N.E.2d 292 In the Matter of Charles E. HOPFL, an Attorney, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs. Subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law mandates automatic disbarment upon conviction of a felony. It is clear that under this section as construed prior to its recent amendment (L.1979, ch. 674), an attorney ceases to be a member of the Bar when convicted of a Federal felony, even one that has no New York analogue (Matter of Thies, 45 N.Y.2d 865, 410 N.Y.S.2d 575, 382 N.E.2d 1351; Matter of Chu, 42 N.Y.2d 490, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 369 N.E.2d 1). Thus, upon his conviction under section 645 of title 15 of the United States Code, a felony under Federal law, appellant was automatically disbarred and it was proper for the Appellate Division at that time to strike his name from the roll of attorneys. The statutory sanction was rendered no less operative because the plea had been entered pursuant to North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162. Although appellant did not admit his guilt, nonetheless he stood convicted of a felony.
In light of this disposition, it is unnecessary to determine whether the Federal offense has a New York counterpart and thus, we do not pass on that question which appropriately should be left to the Appellate Division to consider anew upon proper application. Although the recent amendment to section 90 does not apply on this appeal, we note that appellant, if so advised, is free to make application to the Appellate Division for any relief that may be available.
Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kasckarow v. Bd. of Examiners of Sex Offenders of New York, 10237/11.
...lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 1036, 659 N.Y.S.2d 866, 681 N.E.2d 1313 [1997] ), a predicate for civil penalties ( Matter of Hopfl, 48 N.Y.2d 859, 860, 424 N.Y.S.2d 350, 400 N.E.2d 292 [attorney disbarred based on Alford plea] ), and sex offender registration under SORA ( see People v. J.G., 171 Misc......
-
Matter of Kerr, M-37-80.
...statute.14 That she was convicted of a federal felony, rather than a local offense, is immaterial. See, e. g., In re Hopfl, 48 N.Y.2d 859, 400 N.E.2d 292, 424 N.Y.S.2d 350 (1979); Muniz v. State, 575 S.W.2d 408 (Tex.Civ.App.1978). Nor is the statutory provision any less operative by reason ......
-
Silmon v. Travis
...and may be used against him (see, People v. Miller, 91 N.Y.2d 372, 378, 670 N.Y.S.2d 978, 694 N.E.2d 61; Matter of Hopfl, 48 N.Y.2d 859, 860, 424 N.Y.S.2d 350, 400 N.E.2d 292; Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. v. Arzillo, 98 A.D.2d 495, 505-506, 472 N.Y.S.2d Here, the record discloses that the Parole......
-
Howard v. Stature Elec., Inc.
...[1988] ). Here, the determinative issue was not whether claimant had been convicted of a crime ( contrast Matter of Hopfl, 48 N.Y.2d 859, 860, 424 N.Y.S.2d 350, 400 N.E.2d 292 [1979]; Matter of Feuereisen v. Axelrod, 100 A.D.2d 675, 675-676, 473 N.Y.S.2d 870 [1984], lv. denied 62 N.Y.2d 605......