Rehabilitation Proven

Reinstatement has been granted to a petitioner who had been suspended in Colorado

In September 2020, Mathews was suspended from the practice of law for three years. The suspension was premised on three episodes of misconduct. First, Mathews failed to initiate a guardianship proceeding on behalf of two clients and failed to communicate with them about the status of their case. Next, Mathews was convicted in 2019 for forging her clients’ names on a fee agreement, a class-five misdemeanor. Last, Mathews pleaded guilty in 2019 for driving under the influence and for reckless driving. The hearing board reinstated Mathews, finding that she proved by clear and convincing evidence that she complied with all disciplinary rules and orders, she is fit to practice law, and she has been rehabilitated from her underlying misconduct.

Petitioner’s practice as described by the Hearing Board

Before the matters leading to her three-year suspension, Petitioner practiced for nearly eighteen years with no discipline. Petitioner’s law practice was in the areas of estate planning, elder law, and special needs; it was devoted primarily to assisting families with children or loved ones who live with neurodiversity, speech impairment or communication disability, or other disability for which government programs offer assistance. Petitioner is an expert in the law related to persons with disabilities and the availability of government programs to assist parents of children with disabilities. Petitioner was a highly regarded and sought-after lawyer in this area of the law.

The focus was on rehabiliation from the DUI offense

Ultimately, we conclude that Petitioner has more than convincingly demonstrated her acceptance and responsibility for the conviction and the circumstances leading to the conviction. Although we agree with the People that denying commission of a crime for which one was convicted will often preclude a finding of true rehabilitation, we do not share the People’s view as it applies to Petitioner. We are beyond satisfied with the remorse Petitioner has demonstrated for her serious misconduct and her acceptance for the outcome of her criminal conviction. We base our conclusion on the abundant evidence showing Petitioner’s genuine remorse for the harm she caused her clients and the disrepute she brought to the profession; her sincere recognition that her personal and professional shortcomings created the circumstances leading to those injuries; and her assiduous efforts to improve those shortcomings during her suspension through counseling, mentorship, work experience, legal education, and guided self-reflection. Petitioner knows that she is a convicted felon, and she amply demonstrated her acceptance of that status. Her genuine remorse easily convinces us that she is rehabilitated. We expect, however, that rare would be the case that such a tension would come out as favorably to a petitioner as it does here.

(Mike Frisch)