This saga that I thought was over still has another chapter in it.
Anthony Graves
Lawyers for Charles Sebesta, the ex-prosecutor who secured the wrongful death sentence of Anthony Graves, told a panel of the State Bar of Texas on Friday that he should not be disbarred based on technicalities in the rules that govern lawyer discipline.
[…]
Jane Webre, who was defending Sebesta before the disciplinary board, argued that bar rules prevent the board from making a different ruling on Graves’ recent complaint after it already determined the former prosecutor wasn’t subject to disbarment for his role in that conviction.
“In order for the system to function properly, it’s important that the bar apply the rules fairly and consistently,” Webre told the Texas State Bar Board of Disciplinary Appeals.
Sebesta argued that the bar dismissed the previous complaint not only because of the time bar but also because they found no merit in the accusations against him.
Cynthia Hamilton, senior appellate lawyer for the commission for lawyer discipline at the State Bar, told the panel that Sebesta’s disbarment should remain in effect. In dismissing the previous claim, she said, the Bar did not address the merits of the claims of misconduct, only the statute of limitations, which lawmakers have since extended.
“It was Mr. Sebesta’s own flawed analysis of the definition of just cause that led him to that conclusion,” Hamilton said.
Additionally, she said, if the disciplinary rules were applied as Sebesta contends they should be, lawyers would not face discipline in instances where additional evidence of serious wrongdoing came to light after an initial complaint was dismissed. That would give lawyers – who are not required to cooperate with bar investigators – an incentive to conceal information, she said.
Further, she argued, lawmakers changed the statute of limitations governing prosecutor discipline in 2013 specifically to allow the kind of sanction Sebesta is facing.
“The Legislature gave the [chief disciplinary counsel] its marching orders,” Hamilton said.
See here for the background. I love how guys like Sebesta always reach for the technicalities when the spotlight turns to their own behavior. I’m sure he was ever so solicitous of those finer points of law when he was DA. Be that as it may, he is entitled to a review, and if his argument is deemed valid, then so be it. I personally think Ms. Hamilton has by far the stronger case, and I hope the State Bar sees it that way as well. I agree completely with what Anthony Graves says:
Graves said he said he is confident the panel will uphold Sebesta’s disbarment. And their decision, he said, will have consequences for prosecutors statewide.
“If they uphold the ruling, it says we’re not going to allow prosecutors to just do what they want in the courtroom and not be held accountable,” Graves said. “If they reinstate him, it says to the public that we really don’t care about you, we just protect our own.”
Amen. I don’t know when the State Bar will rule on this, but I hope they get it right.
Pingback: Sebesta remains disbarred – Off the Kuff