Reinstatement Denied

The Kentucky Supreme Court denied rehearing of an order denying reinstatement of an attorney admitted in 1996 and suspended for four years after a criminal conviction

Tejeda initially worked in private practice handling bankruptcy, divorce, and criminal defense matters. After two years in private practice, he worked as a patrol agent for the United States Border Patrol. After four years as a patrol agent, Tejeda moved to the Dominican Republic to teach English and study Spanish. In 2005, Tejeda returned to Kentucky after accepting a position as an assistant Wayne County Attorney. After working in that position for one-and-a-half years, Tejeda was employed as an assistant Madison County Attorney for one year. He then returned to WayneCounty and worked as an assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney for six months before resuming his employment as an assistant County Attorney. Tejeda remained in that role until he was terminated in 2012 following a fatal motor vehicle collision which underlies the present reinstatement proceeding.

Tejeda, by his own admission, is a recovering alcoholic. His problems with alcohol began in his late high school and early college years. Tejeda realized he needed to address his problems with alcohol after meeting a group of missionaries from Los Angeles while he was living in the Dominican Republic. Soon afterward, he became involved with Alcoholics Anonymous (AA). Tejeda maintained sobriety for approximately one-and-a-half years until he stopped participating in AA consistently. He alternated between several months of sobriety and several months of alcohol use.

Relapse

In December 2019, Tejeda attended the Kentucky Law Update (KLU) in Lexington where he saw KYLAP Director Yvette Hourigan. Hourigan subsequently requested a meeting with Tejeda and Tejeda’s KYLAP monitor. At the meeting, Hourigan indicated she smelled alcohol on Tejeda at the KLU. Tejeda lied and denied consuming alcohol. Following this incident, Tejeda recommitted himself to participation in AA and has remained sober. However, Tejeda did not disclose his relapse to anyone in his support system.

Reasons

While reinstatement is available, the severity of Tejeda’s initial misconduct continues to weigh heavily against his application. SCR 2.300(7). Further, Tejeda failed to exhibit the necessary candor concerning relapse in the fall of 2019 and that fact alone would be sufficient cause to deny his application. See SCR 2.300(6). Tejeda did not inform anyone of his ongoing and excessive alcohol use until it was discovered by chance at a KLU event and then he lied about it. This lie directly related to a primary object of the reinstatement inquiry—Tejeda’s management of his addiction to alcohol.

Dissent of Justice Nickell

With due respect to the indisputable strides Tejeda has made toward positive change, the present record belies his claim to have fully and realistically accepted responsibility for the management of his addiction. Although Tejeda “has taken steps toward rehabilitation,” his lack of candor regarding the central subject of this application precludes reinstatement at this time. Burns, 318 S.W.3d at 597. Consistent with our decision in Sowell, I would deny Tejeda’s application for reinstatement with leave to submit a new application in two years from the date of this Order.