IN MATTER OF FLAGGMAN, SB-07-0177-D (Ariz. 1-8-2008)

IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN D. FLAGGMAN, Attorney No. 19463 Respondent.

Supreme Court No. SB-07-0177-DSupreme Court of Arizona.
January 8, 2008

RUTH V. McGREGOR, Chief Justice.

On October 10, 2007, Respondent pled guilty to and was sentenced on two counts of Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device, A.R.S. § 13-2003, Class 6 undesignated felonies. Respondent filed a “Verified Motion Regarding Good Cause Regarding Automatic Suspension Pursuant to Rule 53(h)2A, ARIZ.R.SUP.CT.” Respondent seeks to demonstrate the good cause necessary to avoid automatic interim suspension for conviction of a felony under Rule 53(h)(2)(A). The State Bar filed a response to the motion and filed a Motion for Interim Suspension pursuant to Rule 53(h)(2)(A) or (B).

Under Rule 53(h)(2)(A), a respondent is automatically placed on interim suspension after the conviction of a felony. In this case, however, respondent was convicted of two Class 6 undesignated felony offenses. A Class 6 undesignated offense is not a felony for disciplinary purposes until the trial court designates it a felony. In the Matter of Beren, 178 Ariz. 400, 403, 874 P.2d 320, 323 (1994). Thus, the automatic provisions of Rule 53(h)(2)(A) do not apply in this case.

Page 2

Alternatively, the State Bar argues that respondent’s convictions for Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device are serious crimes under Rule 53(h)(2)(B) that require his suspension pending completion of the disciplinary proceedings. The Court agrees. The Court acknowledges respondent’s recent rehabilitation efforts and hopes these efforts will continue to be successful. In light of the nature of respondent’s convictions, however, interim suspension is necessary to protect the public. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED granting the State Bar’s Motion for Interim Suspension pursuant to Rule 53(h)(2)(B). STEVEN D. FLAGGMAN is hereby suspended from the practice of law effective this date.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the suspension shall continue in effect until final disposition of all pending proceedings against STEVEN D.FLAGGMAN, unless earlier vacated or modified.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that STEVEN D. FLAGGMAN, from this date, shall not accept for representation any new cases, nor shall he agree to represent any existing client after the effective date of this Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that STEVEN D. FLAGGMAN is precluded from distributing funds from any trust account to anyone except with the written approval of bar counsel or of this court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 72(a), Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, STEVEN D. FLAGGMAN shall notify all his clients within ten (10) days from the date hereof of his inability to continue to represent them and that they should promptly retain new counsel, and shall promptly inform this Court of his compliance with

Page 3

this Order as provided by Rule 72(e), Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED treating Respondent’s “Verified Motion Regarding Good Cause Regarding Automatic Suspension Pursuant to Rule 53(h)2A, ARIZ.R.SUP.CT” as a verified response to the motion for interim suspension.

DATED this ___ day of January, 2008.


Steven D. Flaggman (Certified Mail, Return Receipt and Regular Mail)

Nancy A Greenlee

Amy K Rehm, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Arizona

Nancy Swetnam, Acting Disciplinary Clerk

Sandra Montoya, Records Manager, State Bar of Arizona (Cert. Copy)

Perry Thompson, Director, United States Supreme Court (Cert. Copy)

Cathy A Catterson, Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit (Cert. Copy)

Mr. Richard H Weare, Clerk, United States District Court, for the District of Arizona, Office of the Clerk (Phoenix) (Cert. Copy)

Jode Ottman, West Publishing Company, Editorial

Department D3-40 #4467

Lexis Nexis, Legal Data Collection

Page 1