In re Plunkett, 110819 NVSC, 79075
|Opinion Judge:||Gibbons C.J.|
|Party Name:||IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF ALEXIS A. PLUNKETT, BAR|
|Judge Panel:||Pickering J., Hardesty J., Parraguirre J., Stiglich J., Cadish J., Silver J.|
|Case Date:||November 08, 2019|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Nevada|
ORDER OF DISBARMENT
This is an automatic review under SCR 105(3)(b) of a Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board hearing panel's recommendation that attorney Alexis A. Plunkett be suspended from the practice of law for five years and one day based on violations of RPC 3.3(a)(1) (candor towards the tribunal), RPC 8.4(b) (committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), RPC 8.4(c) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and RPC 8.4(d) (engaging in conduct which is prejudicial to the administration of justice). The panel further recommends that Plunkett be required to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings.
The State Bar has the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that Plunkett committed the violations charged. SCR 105(2)(f); In re Discipline of Drakulich, 111 Nev. 1556, 1566, 908 P.2d 709, 715 (1995). We employ a deferential standard of review with respect to the hearing panel's findings of fact, SCR l05(3)(b), and will not set them aside unless they are clearly erroneous or not supported by substantial evidence, see generally Sowers v. Forest Hills Subdivision, 129 Nev. 99, 105, 294 P.3d 427, 432 (2013); Ogawa v. Ogawa, 125 Nev. 660, 668, 221 P.3d 699, 704 (2009).
Having reviewed the record on appeal, we conclude that there is substantial evidence to support the panel's findings that Plunkett violated RPC 3.3(a)(1) and RPC 8.4(b)-(d). See Sowers, 129 Nev. at 105, 294 P.3d at 432; Ogawa, 125 Nev. at 668, 221 P.3d at 704. Plunkett was convicted, via a guilty plea, of a felony for using a cell phone with client inmates housed at Clark County Detention Center. Further, evidence in the record showed that Plunkett allowed a client inmate housed with the Nevada Department of Corrections to touch her in a sexual manner in I violation of that department's policies. Plunkett also made false statements; regarding these actions to the State Bar, to a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP