Suspension For Domestic Violence

A sanction imposed for domestic violence is summarized on the web page of the Colorado Presiding Disciplinary Judge

 A hearing board suspended Philip M. Falco III (attorney registration number 27930) from the practice of law for nine months, with the requirement that he petition for reinstatement, ifat all, under C.R.C.P. 251.29(c). In such a proceeding, Falco will bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that he has been rehabilitated, has complied with disciplinary orders and rules, and is fit to practice law. Falco’s suspension took effect August 11, 2016.

In 2015, Falco pleaded guilty to attempted third-degree assault. In the underlying incident, the hearing board found, Falco struck his then-wife with a closed fist several times while pinning her on a bed. He then pulled her off the bed. Falco’s wife, who was then twenty weeks pregnant, suffered a concussion. The couple’s three children were present in the home at the time of the assault. The hearing board found that Falco then made false statements about the incident to the sheriff’s deputy who responded to a 9-1-1 call placed by Falco’s wife.

Falco’s violent conduct violated Colo. RPC 8.4(b), which provides that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.

An attached full opinion tells the story

 According to Ms. Falco, on December 1, 2013, she and Respondent argued in their garage while getting out Christmas decorations. Respondent made belittling comments, including saying she was “just a piece of trash,” and accused her of having an affair with someone she met in her emergency medical technician school. She grew frightened that he would hit her. She went into the house, got her phone, and entered “9-1-1,” planning not to place the call unless Respondent struck her. While she was in the kitchen, near where her children were watching a movie, Respondent grabbed the phone from her hand and hit her on her face. She managed to get her phone, then pushed past him and ran to the bedroom. She tried to call 9-1-1 and screamed out her address, but the call did not go through. Although she had tried to lock the door, Respondent kicked the door in, pushed her onto the bed, and punched her in the face multiple times with a closed fist while he straddled her stomach. She was able to push and kick him off her, but he grabbed her foot and pulled her off the bed. When she was able to stand up, she reached for her phone to call the police, but Respondent prevented her from doing so, while threatening to destroy her life and take her children.

 Ms. Falco testified—and Respondent admits—that the couple’s children then walked into the bedroom. According to Ms. Falco, she rushed her two youngest children into the car—all three of them shoeless—and drove away from the house. After driving around the block in tears for about half an hour, she decided to call 9-1-1 from a pay phone. The Adams County police met her, and she signed a consent form allowing them to search her home. She had bruises on her face, her head hurt, she saw double, and she felt sick and dizzy. She did not seek medical treatment at the time, however, because she wanted to ensure that her five-year-old son at home was safe. The next day, Ms. Falco visited St. Anthony’s North Hospital, where she was diagnosed with a concussion, as confirmed by hospital records.

Sanction

Respondent committed a violent assault on his pregnant wife while his children were present in the family home. That conduct represented a “raw assault on the basic individual right to physical security that lies at the core of civilized society.” Moreover, the assault ran counter to Respondent’s role as a lawyer, since “[t]he essence of the conduct of a lawyer is to facilitate the resolution of conflicts without recourse to violence, for law is the alternative to violence.” In this disciplinary case, Respondent has not been fully candid, nor has he given the Hearing Board any confidence that his misconduct will not recur. The appropriate sanction for Respondent’s conduct is a nine-month served suspension with the requirement that Respondent formally petition for reinstatement.

(Mike Frisch)