McMullin, In re, 49700

Decision Date04 June 1963
Docket NumberNo. 49700,49700
Citation370 S.W.2d 151
PartiesIn re James L. McMULLIN, Petitioner.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

J. K. Owens, Kansas City, for petitioner.

Douglas Stripp, Kansas City, for Advisory Committee of the Missouri Bar.

STORCKMAN, Judge.

This is an original proceeding to determine what disciplinary action should be taken against the petitioner, James L. McMullin, a duly licensed attorney at law practicing in Kansas City, Missouri.

On August 10, 1962, Mr. McMullin filed his petition in this court stating that on June 15, 1962, an information was filed against him in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri charging him in five counts with willful failure to file federal income tax returns for the five years from 1956 to 1960; that the offense charged was a misdemeanor under the statutes of the United States; that on July 17, 1962, he entered a plea of guilty to the first two counts of the information, and on July 29 was sentenced on these counts to three months' imprisonment in the United States Medical Center in Springfield; that the other three counts of the information were dismissed. The petitioner voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of this court for the purpose of having the court judicially determine what, if any, disciplinary action should be taken against him.

The petitioner's application was referred to the Advisory Committee of the Missouri Bar Administration for investigation and report. The Advisory Committee conducted hearings at which the petitioner appeared and testified. He was also given the opportunity to produce other witnesses. On March 1, 1963, the Advisory Committee filed its report and recommendation. The petitioner filed a response to the report of the Advisory Committee in which he agreed that the facts set out in the report of the Advisory Committee were true with minor exceptions which will be noted in the course of the opinion.

The supreme court has original jurisdiction of matters pertaining to the disciplining of members of the Bar and may suspend or disbar a member in a proper case. In re Foley, Mo., 364 S.W.2d 1.

James L. McMullin, now 36 years of age, was born in Parma, New Madrid County, Missouri. He attended elementary school in New Madrid County and Saline and Dodge City, Kansas, and attended high school and graduated from Center High School in Kansas City. He attended the University of Kansas City and received an A.B. degree in English and an L.L.B. degree in Law in 1951. He was admitted to practice in Missouri on January 21, 1951. After completing his service in the Korean War, he began the practice of law in Kansas City and for three or four years was an associate in the office of William R. Ross, an attorney of admitted integrity. Thereafter he practiced by himself in Kansas City, renting office room in suites with other lawyers.

Mr. McMullin served in the United States Navy in World War II as a 3d Class Petty Officer. In the Korean War he was commissioned as a 2d Lieutenant in the Marine Corps, then promoted to 1st Lieutenant and Captain and thereafter was a Major in the Marine Corps Reserve. For nine of the seventeen months that he was in Korea, he served in an artillery outfit and the rest of the time he was a prosecutor for the Government trying general court martial cases. He had eighteen years service in the Reserve. On September 8, 1962, while Mr. McMullin was confined at the U. S. Medical Center in Springfield, he was dropped from the rolls of the Marine Corps Reserve on order of the Secretary of the U. S. Navy. Dropping from the rolls effects complete severance of the individual concerned from the Naval service; no certificate of discharge is issued upon separation by dropping from the rolls. At the hearing held in this matter on November 29, 1962, Mr. McMullin testified that he held a Major's commission in the Marine Corps Reserve. In his response to the Committee's report, he states that he had no knowledge that he had been dropped from the Marine Corps Reserve when he testified at the hearing and was not so notified until sometime in December 1962.

Mr. McMullin was married in 1948, has a son 8 years of age, a daughter 6 years of age, and a wife, who is 34 years of age. He has been active in church work in Kansas City and is a member of the Board of Deacons of his church. He has taught Sunday School classes at his church for the past five years and still teaches a class. He and his wife are active and former officers in a group of young people in their church and he has been active in Boy Scout work.

On July 27, 1962, the Honorable Richard M. Duncan, Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, upon petitioner's plea of guilty to Counts I and II, being his failure to make a federal income tax return for the years 1956 and 1957, sentenced him to serve a term of three months on each count, such sentences to run concurrently, in the United States Medical Center at Springfield, Missouri, to begin serving said three months sentence on August 5, 1962. He served said sentence with the exception of nine days given him for good behavior while serving his sentence. At the time of sentencing the petitioner, Judge Duncan made a statement of which the following is a part:

'Now gentlemen, the Court has before it the pre-sentence report, which has not revealed anything particularly that the Court did not already know. This young man has practiced here and has devoted his practice exclusively to the criminal field. He has expressed a preference for that field. But I think he has violated not only from my observation, but from the report that has come to me, the presentence report, and things we must know, I think he has probably violated the three most important rules of a criminal lawyer. In the first place, a lawyer who represents criminals does not stand as high in the community as some other members of the profession. That is a matter of common knowledge, and for that reason when he does represent criminals, he ought to be well paid for it, better than the ordinary lawyer, to make up for that situation, if that is his chosen line of work. I do not believe that this Defendant did that.

'The second is that he ought never to become an associate of the criminals he represents, because when he does that he places himself pretty much on the same plane as those he represents. There is certainly nothing dishonorable about a man representing those people charged with crime, the law gives them that right, and the profession requires it in most instances, but to put himself on the same plane is not a good thing.

'I do not like to say this gentlemen, but it is a fact. It is a matter I feel I should say, that for a considerable period of time there has been a feeling among a good many people, and among Courts as a matter of fact, that this Defendant's ideas and conceptions of the practice of law have not been consistent with the high ideals of the great profession to which he belongs; that he, in a good many instances, has been guilty of acts and conduct with respect to his practice that have not been looked upon with favor by members of his own profession, and that is not a matter for this Court to be concerned with. I simply make that statement, and unless he changes his entire conception of the duties and the responsibilities of a lawyer to himself, and to his profession and to the community, it is my opinion he should never again be permitted to practice before this Court, regardless of what his future may be. It may be necessary to seek a livelihood in other fields.

Mr. McMullin readily assumed the blame for his income tax troubles. His explanation was that he did not have the money to pay his income taxes when the returns were due and, through the accountant who customarily prepared his returns, he obtained extensions of time for filing the returns. Photostatic copies of the extension for each year involved were attached to the report as exhibits. He testified that he believed that by obtaining extensions he would not be guilty of criminal violation although he knew that eventually he would have to pay the tax with interest. He further testified that the Internal Revenue Service had gone over his books and presented him with a statement showing his taxes to be about $6,000 for the five...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Duncan, In re, 75162
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1992
    ...moral turpitude. In re Burrus, 258 S.W.2d 625, 627 (Mo. banc 1953); In re Moon, 310 S.W.2d 935, 936 (Mo. banc 1958); In re McMullin, 370 S.W.2d 151, 155 (Mo. banc 1963); In re Lurkins, 374 S.W.2d 67, 68 (Mo. banc 1964); In re MacLeod, 479 S.W.2d 443, 445 (Mo. banc), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 9......
  • Caranchini, Matter of
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • November 4, 1998
    ...Supreme Court has often provided for leave to apply for reinstatement within a certain number of years. See, e.g., In re McMullin, 370 S.W.2d 151, 156 (Mo.1963) (en banc); In re Foley, 364 S.W.2d 1, 9 (Mo.1963) (en banc). In the event that application for reinstatement is made consistent wi......
  • Littleton, In re, 66570
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1986
    ...S.W.2d 321 (Mo. banc 1970).3 years--In re Houtchens, 555 S.W.2d 24 (Mo. banc 1977); In re Mattes, 409 S.W.2d 54 (Mo. banc 1966); In re McMullin, 370 S.W.2d 151 (Mo. banc 1963); In re McLendon, 337 S.W.2d 56 (Mo. banc 1960); In re Canzoneri, 334 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1960).5 years--In re Lurki......
  • MacLeod, In re, 57030
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1972
    ...income in 1964 was $12,821.92; Count III that his gross income in 1965 was $18,143.53.3 In re Lurkins, Mo., 374 S.W.2d 67; In re McMullin, Mo., 370 S.W.2d 151; In re Burrus, 364 Mo. 22, 258 S.W.2d 625.4 For decisions from other jurisdictions he refers us to Annotation: State Court Disciplin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT