The problem is...the county electorate, if not the jury, cannot maintain a high level of confidence in a DA who demonstrates a lack of professionalism and responsibility. After the issues this prosecutor's office has had to deal with....one would think that maintaining credentials in a timely manner would be treated with care. Perception matters.
Colorado Supreme Court suspends law license of 11th Judicial District Attorney | KRDO
A live TV news station covering breaking news and traffic for Colorado Springs, Pueblo, and Southern Colorado with a strong investigative teamkrdo.com
[. ]
The Colorado Supreme Court says it sent Stanley several notices alerting her that she was out of compliance and at risk of a license suspension. According to state judicial officials, the 11th Judicial District Attorney's Office will continue business as usual and that this will not impact active cases in Fremont, Custer, Chaffee, and Park counties.
Stanley tells 13 Investigates she received a letter from the state last week about the license issue and that she fully intends to fix the issue. Stanley says there was a mix-up in who was sending what for the license requirements. She also said the suspension is "not a big deal" and that law license suspensions are not uncommon.
[. ]
Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice* #102
- Thread starter Mysti88c
- Start date
New Posts
-
Japan - Miyazawa family of 4 murdered, Setagaya, Tokyo, 30 Dec 2000 #3- Latest: FlowersInBloom
- Status
To the contrary, I think MSM was willing to give DA LS the benefit of the doubt from the beginning notwithstanding her dodgy ethical history and underwhelming professional experience. Many voters did, too.Not making excuses for LS but things are not always as they appear and/or reported:
IMO, MSM doesn't miss any opportunity to pounce on DA Stanley-- so why should allegedly failing to timely complete the required 45 hours of CPE be any different! Reminds me of the time a Judge accused LS of refusing to work (Headline News) when the truth was the weekday he wanted to schedule hearings, was for better than 8 years, the same date that every Judge in the 11 District spent in chambers. In other words, he was the single Judge who had his shorts twisted after the newly elected DA didn't favor a request to change the schedule, just for him.
The latest could very well be a situation where LS completed 44 of 45 hours, was 1 credit shy, and, failed to apply for a waiver. Or not all completed hours were recorded properly (esp. during COVID), or not completed in the correct category.
Then again, LS may have been grossly negligent, but just the same, what's evident to me is how MSM never seems to contact LS for a statement prior to publishing only one side of this issue-- the damaging side that will live on in archived news forever.
Personally, I'm also subject to fulfilling continuing professional education (CPE) with a calendar end date of 12/31, where more than once I've had a Nov-Dec scheduled course canceled at the last minute for whatever including inclement weather (and my hours that far exceeded the total required per year were deemed completed in the wrong category). And then there was the COVID excuse I was given where I had to chase down numerous CPE certificates, verifying my hours completed by zoom, whereas with live attendance, the Sponsor submits your hours directly to the regulating body. MOO
ETA: My post beat news by @Cindizzi -- seems that LS was probably subject to what I faced during COVID where the Sponsor did not directly report virtual hours completed.
Stanley says there was a mix-up in who was sending what for the license requirements.
I agree that this alone won't cost LS her law license, but it reinforces the impression that the administrative lapses that led to Judge L's exclusion of evidence for discovery violations has more than a little to do with her personal deficiencies.
Law and order voters loved her aggressive posturing, and peace officers wanted one of their own - someone who would say yes when they wanted to file charges, whether the case was ready or not. Well, that's what they got, for sure.
10ofRods
Verified Anthropologist
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 15,553
- Reaction score
- 194,820
Continuing Legal Education is not 'personal development,' it's a requirement for maintaining a license. She was, as I understand it, a year out of compliance and they sent many notices.
If you have to have a license to do something and it expires, you can't do it any more. Do you allow pilots to continue to fy in UK if their license has expired? Give them another year to get their lives together?
And then, of course, no one gets a free pass just because their job is perceived as more important. A D.A. is first and foremost a functioning attorney (and frankly, L. Stanley does not impress me - maybe she really needs to get all those CLE units, perhaps focusing on pre-trial motions).
No one was looking for an excuse to suspend her. She was suspended along with about 100 others, and it was probably all made official by a computer, not a "they" in the licensing division.
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,653
- Reaction score
- 423,191
I have great respect for term-limited Dan May. However, I also know that a successful DA does not stand alone, and surrounds her/himself with a smart, qualified team of prosecutors and staff -- the worker bees if you will. Jeff Lindsey, Deputy DA that resigned from this case last October, was Dan May's right-hand guy for 19 years.
IMO, I think there are some misguided opinions that the DA alone is responsible for singularly admitting evidence and cranking out all the motions for the case when in fact it's more likely that the prosecutors assigned to this case, fell short of their responsibilities. Naturally, the buck stops with the DA: the DA represents the state, and they failed under her watch.
Generally, the DA, an elected official, puts in their time on a case on the front end-- long before the perpetrator is criminally charged. They typically assist police in the investigation of criminal offenses, provide legal opinions to police relative to investigations, advise them on the drafting of criminal complaints, search warrants, and statements of probable cause. The DA ultimately evaluates the evidence and is responsible for deciding whether or not to prosecute the case.
And we can't forget that in addition to supervising the team of prosecutors for the Morphew case, LS is also responsible for supervising the prosecutors of Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, and Park Counties, and their caseload. (i.e., 11 Judicial District). MOO
Personally, I'd love to have a conversation with Jeff Lindsey!!
IMO, I think there are some misguided opinions that the DA alone is responsible for singularly admitting evidence and cranking out all the motions for the case when in fact it's more likely that the prosecutors assigned to this case, fell short of their responsibilities. Naturally, the buck stops with the DA: the DA represents the state, and they failed under her watch.
Generally, the DA, an elected official, puts in their time on a case on the front end-- long before the perpetrator is criminally charged. They typically assist police in the investigation of criminal offenses, provide legal opinions to police relative to investigations, advise them on the drafting of criminal complaints, search warrants, and statements of probable cause. The DA ultimately evaluates the evidence and is responsible for deciding whether or not to prosecute the case.
And we can't forget that in addition to supervising the team of prosecutors for the Morphew case, LS is also responsible for supervising the prosecutors of Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, and Park Counties, and their caseload. (i.e., 11 Judicial District). MOO
Personally, I'd love to have a conversation with Jeff Lindsey!!
I
100 of the 22,802 attorneys in CO did not meet their continuing education requirements this year.
Just for clarity.
100 of the 22,802 attorneys in CO did not meet their continuing education requirements this year.
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,653
- Reaction score
- 423,191
I'm fairly certain that out of the 100 attorneys, there was only one District Attorney!
ITA with your last sentence. It's time to recognize that SM's murder is a special case that calls for exceptional organization and advocacy skills.
The immediate previous DA, Kaitlin Turner, was appointed to fill the last year of the previous elected incumbent, long term DA Molly Chilson, who resigned in Summer, 2019 after a controversial decision not to charge a public official with embezzlement, citing a county commission policy that undermined the charge. Reading between the lines, making the right decision as a prosecutor adversely affected her relations with the Fremont County Commissioners and Sheriff. Fremont is by far the most populous county in the 11th JD, so it drives the District's electoral politics. Chilson resigned to give the prosecutor's office a chance to restore working relationships and stabilize the office. Unlike Stanley, she put the public interest over her personal career.
LE asked Turner, then a federal corrections official and Canon City Councillor, to apply for the vacancy, and she did a good job of restoring stability and transparency according to LE. Although she is a brilliant lawyer (she was Senior Law Clerk for the Honorable Nancy Lichtenstein), she had two deficiencies as a DA candidate: she had no experience as a prosecutor and more important, she is a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Republican part of Colorado. She was soundly defeated in the general election by Stanley.
The more interesting question is whether the Republicans had a better choice in the 2020 primary. Stanley defeated former two term DA Thom LeDoux for the nomination. During his terms as DA, his fellow prosecutors honored him by electing him president of the Colorado District Attorneys Council. Stanley was elected in the general wave of political foolishness that followed 2016, and I believe the Morphew fiasco is the tip of an iceberg of administrative cockups that will come to light soon.
<modsnip>
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,653
- Reaction score
- 423,191
In promotion of full disclosure (versus clickbait headlines) here are the facts about DA LS:
DA Stanley was admitted (Colo Bar) on 10/29/2012.
No previous interruptions or suspension of LS license before the CLE issue.
*Disciplinary History:
The complete conditional admission of misconduct is linked below for reference.
*In Feb 2017, while in private practice, LS agreed to represent a client in a civil matter. Eight days later, she accepted a job with the CO Dept of Revenue, and failed to tell the client she left private practice-- but sent him a statement reminding him his account was 90 days past due.
In June 2017, the client filed a complaint against LS. In July 2017, LS attempted to withdraw from the case, but her filing was rejected due to errors in the caption and an improper form. She did not successfully file a motion to withdraw until August 2017. When LS failed to give the client formal notice of her intent to withdraw (as of August 2017), the client filed a pro-se motion to terminate her representation......
The 5/16/2019 public censure did not affect LS's license, and obviously had no effect on her running for the office of District Attorney.
Through her conduct, Stanley violated Colo. RPC 1.3 (a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness when representing a client); Colo. RPC 1.4(a)(3) (a lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of the matter); Colo. RPC 1.6(a) (a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent); Colo. RPC 1.16(d) (a lawyer shall protect a client’s interests upon termination of the representation, including by giving reasonable notice to the client).
ETA:
Under Complaints FAQ, the same conduct by LS is listed under "common rule violations for which attorneys may be disciplined."
Public or private censure is a reprimand by a body administering the ethics rules. Some refer to this as a “slap on the wrist,” but clients might be inclined to find alternate representation if they know their attorney was censured.
DA Stanley was admitted (Colo Bar) on 10/29/2012.
No previous interruptions or suspension of LS license before the CLE issue.
*Disciplinary History:
| Case Number* | Date | Disposition | Term | Status | Supreme Court |
| 18PDJ058 | 5/16/2019 | Public Censure | Issued |
The complete conditional admission of misconduct is linked below for reference.
*In Feb 2017, while in private practice, LS agreed to represent a client in a civil matter. Eight days later, she accepted a job with the CO Dept of Revenue, and failed to tell the client she left private practice-- but sent him a statement reminding him his account was 90 days past due.
In June 2017, the client filed a complaint against LS. In July 2017, LS attempted to withdraw from the case, but her filing was rejected due to errors in the caption and an improper form. She did not successfully file a motion to withdraw until August 2017. When LS failed to give the client formal notice of her intent to withdraw (as of August 2017), the client filed a pro-se motion to terminate her representation......
The 5/16/2019 public censure did not affect LS's license, and obviously had no effect on her running for the office of District Attorney.
Through her conduct, Stanley violated Colo. RPC 1.3 (a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness when representing a client); Colo. RPC 1.4(a)(3) (a lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of the matter); Colo. RPC 1.6(a) (a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent); Colo. RPC 1.16(d) (a lawyer shall protect a client’s interests upon termination of the representation, including by giving reasonable notice to the client).
Attorney Information
www.coloradosupremecourt.com
ETA:
Under Complaints FAQ, the same conduct by LS is listed under "common rule violations for which attorneys may be disciplined."
Public or private censure is a reprimand by a body administering the ethics rules. Some refer to this as a “slap on the wrist,” but clients might be inclined to find alternate representation if they know their attorney was censured.
Cindizzi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2019
- Messages
- 10,910
- Reaction score
- 150,583
District attorney who prosecuted Barry Morphew has law license suspended
The Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel has suspended the law license of the district attorney who oversaw Barry Morphew's murder case for failing to complete required legal training.
[. ]
Under Colorado Supreme Court guidelines, 11th Judicial District Attorney Linda Stanley's license can be reinstated once she files a plan to make up the 45 hours of continuing legal education she and all state attorneys are required to complete every three years.
Jessica Yates, who oversees the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, said Stanley failed to complete her required hours of continuing legal education for the years 2019, 2020 and 2021 despite several notices reminding her to do so. Yates said the failure to complete the required training is unusual.
"I've worked here for four years and have never seen this happen with an elected DA," she said.
The suspension means that Stanley cannot appear in court or file pleadings during her suspension, but other lawyers in her office who are compliant can take on her duties. The 11th Judicial District includes Chaffee, Fremont, Custer and Park counties.
Tom Raynes, executive director of the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, said the suspension is a serious matter.
"Fortunately, this is a situation that can be remedied as soon as DA Stanley can submit verification of either previously completing or promptly completing the missing education credits and the Supreme Court can verify and process that completion," Raynes said.
[. ]
What would Stanley have done if that had been one of her deputy DA's? At the very least, it is disruptive to efficiency of the DA's office. Any restrictions on the DA from decision-making or performance as a result of the suspension damages the operation. She is an elected official who was "sworn in". Did she uphold her oath of office? She let her department down, imo. I would be looking elsewhere come the next election.
4/10ths of 1%....She's in exclusive company.
Yes we went round the houses on this at the time, but sadly seeing we didn't have Judge Lama's written decision, we had to let it drop.
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,653
- Reaction score
- 423,191
It's probably best we didn't see Judge Lama's written decision -- I'd already seen enough cut and paste borrowed from the defense. MOO
RSBM. RBBM.
In sum, LS left her prosecutor job and entered solo private practice for a brief period, while applying for any jobs with a steady paycheck. Within a year, she accepted a position as an administrative hearings officer. Without notifying the complaining client or recommending alternate counsel, she abandoned him and sent him an invoice. One cannot minimize this behavior by suggesting that anything that doesn't result in suspension or disbarment is of little consequence.
LS had no previous disciplinary record at the time. If Disciplinary Counsel viewed this as a minor matter, there were disciplinary actions that would not have created a blot on LS's public record. She could have received a private admonition or censure. She could have been placed in a "diversion program" which would take her out of the disciplinary system entirely, but she apparently did not meet the criteria (see below). In the circumstances, the fact that the Disciplinary Counsel chose to warn the public about her is significant, with respect to their assessment of both the likelihood that she would harm the public during a diversion period and the likelihood that she would benefit from participation in such a program.
From the FAQ:
"What is a Diversion Agreement?
Generally speaking, if the respondent attorney's conduct would warrant a private admonition or a public censure, the case may be eligible for diversion. Diversion is an alternative to discipline. Diversion agreements are governed by C.R.C.P. 242.17.
The rule provides three general criteria for when the office may offer diversion:
There is little likelihood of the attorney harming the public during the diversion period.
The office can adequately supervise the diversion program.
The attorney is likely to benefit from participation in the program.
If the attorney's conduct would warrant a sanction greater than public censure, the case generally will not be diverted. Those circumstances may include misappropriation of funds, serious criminal conduct, loss by a client due to the conduct, or a pattern of misconduct.
For more details on when diversion may be offered and when it may not, read C.R.C.P. 242.17(b).
Diversion agreements can last from one to three years. As part of the diversion, the attorney generally agrees to refrain from further misconduct for the term of the diversion. The attorney may be required to undergo monitoring to help prevent further misconduct. If the diversion is successfully completed, the case is dismissed. If the attorney violates the terms of the diversion, disciplinary proceedings may follow."
Thank you for this summary.
O.Incandenza
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2020
- Messages
- 544
- Reaction score
- 8,377
Wow, I'd never actually read the censure decision against her before. You're even understating it by quite a bit.
She accepted a case and signed an engagement letter. 8 days later she accepted a government job but never informed her new client that she had left private practice and could no longer represent them. Instead she sent them an invoice (and even assessed late fees). The client later learned from a 3rd party that she was now working for the government. When they contacted her about it, she told them they owed her past due fees and threatened to send them to collection. And refused to refer them to a new lawyer until they paid her.
By that time, the case had a trial date set. So the client went to the judge with his concerns about his lawyer. A month later, Stanley tried to withdraw from the case. But she was apparently incapable of filing the correct form with the correct court, so she was unsuccessful. Eventually, the client had to file a pro se motion to terminate her representation. She failed to show up for the hearing on that motion. The judge ordered her to appear for a new hearing. She filed her own motion where she inappropriately revealed lots of confidential client information. The judge finally removed her from the case.
That is an impressive combination of unethical and incompetent.
Love Never Fails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 12,920
- Reaction score
- 82,346
What you said makes perfect sense. But…I have great respect for term-limited Dan May. However, I also know that a successful DA does not stand alone, and surrounds her/himself with a smart, qualified team of prosecutors and staff -- the worker bees if you will. Jeff Lindsey, Deputy DA that resigned from this case last October, was Dan May's right-hand guy for 19 years.
IMO, I think there are some misguided opinions that the DA alone is responsible for singularly admitting evidence and cranking out all the motions for the case when in fact it's more likely that the prosecutors assigned to this case, fell short of their responsibilities. Naturally, the buck stops with the DA: the DA represents the state, and they failed under her watch.
Generally, the DA, an elected official, puts in their time on a case on the front end-- long before the perpetrator is criminally charged. They typically assist police in the investigation of criminal offenses, provide legal opinions to police relative to investigations, advise them on the drafting of criminal complaints, search warrants, and statements of probable cause. The DA ultimately evaluates the evidence and is responsible for deciding whether or not to prosecute the case.
And we can't forget that in addition to supervising the team of prosecutors for the Morphew case, LS is also responsible for supervising the prosecutors of Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, and Park Counties, and their caseload. (i.e., 11 Judicial District). MOO
Personally, I'd love to have a conversation with Jeff Lindsey!!
As a member of society with no legal experience who just wants to see BM behind bars, I have to say all these things and news bits about Linda Stanley not turning things in on time, not running a tight ship, etc. is sort of creepy. I’m frankly tired of it all but I don’t live there and can’t vote for her or against her. Just leaves a very bad impression of her. Was she trying to throw this case? Being paid to do so? Bribed? Blackmailed? Just a dereliction of duties?
Is LE going to find Suzanne? IS LS running out the clock on her term in office so that BM goes free?
I would like to add that a new determined, experienced prosecutor might be needed before BM is ever arrested. People talk about how nervous he is. I think he’s dancing!
RSBM - I don’t think I agree, at least on the need for a exceptional organization. The DA’s case rested on expert witnesses and without the expert witnesses, the case was dismissed by the DA’s request. It only takes average organizational skills to get the expert witness paperwork in on time, below average organizational skills to get the expert witness paper work after getting a 2 week extension and I’m not even sure you need any organizational skills when you are given one last 24 hour extension and still miss it..
I don’t blame this all on LS, although the buck stops with her. It’s mostly the fault of the responsible attorney on the prosecution team who was tasked with getting the paperwork in. If no one was assigned then the lead prosecutor. IMO LS should have apologized to the people of Colorado and publicly fired the person responsible for missing all these deadlines.
MOO
Love Never Fails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 12,920
- Reaction score
- 82,346
I agree with apologizing to the people of Colorado AND Suzanne’s family.
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,653
- Reaction score
- 423,191
I'm seeing a new Judicial District administration, a prosecution team made up of new hires, and a DA with less than 10 years of experience, factoring big here.
On the other hand, as I posted earlier how the DA typically does much of their work on the front end, working with LE and investigators, and examining the evidence even before criminal charges are filed against the perpetrator, LS deserves a majority of the credit for getting the no body murder case of Kelsie Schelling to the point where the acting 10th Judicial District DA finally recommended murder charges and made the decision to prosecute the case. It took more than 6 years but LS kept her promise to Kelsie's family that she would not leave the 10th Judicial District until charges were filed against Kelsie's killer. And Donte Lucas was convicted of 1st- degree murder last March. JMO
Last edited:
- Status