In re Billy L. Ponds
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 05-BG-398 IN RE B ILLY L. P ONDS, R ESPONDENT A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 379883) On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility (BDN 149-02 and 8-03) (Decided June 9, 2005) Before T ERRY and G LICKMAN, Associate Judges, and S TEADMAN, Senior Judge. P ER C URIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility ( the Board ), after considering the report of a Hearing Committee, has concluded that respondent Billy L. Ponds, violated Rule 1.6 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct by improperly disclosing confidential information in a motion to withdraw as defense counsel for a client. 2 Under Rule 8.5 (a) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, A lawyer admitted to practice in this jurisdiction is subject to the disciplinary authority of this jurisdiction, regardless of where the lawyer s conduct occurs. Under Rule 8.5 (b)(1), which governs choice of law, when the conduct giving rise to a disciplinary action is connected with a court proceeding, the [disciplinary] rules to be applied [in this jurisdiction] shall be the rules of the jurisdiction in which the court sits, unless the rules of the court provide otherwise[.] Thus it is that this court can impose a sanction upon a member of its own bar for violation of a Maryland rule. As a sanction for this disciplinary violation, the Board recommends that respondent be publicly censured. Since neither Bar Counsel nor respondent opposes that recommendation, our deference to it is heightened. See D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 9 (g)(2); In re Delaney, 697 A.2d 1212, 1214 (D.C. 1997). And because there is substantial support in the record for the Board s findings, we accept them. See D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 9 (g)(1). We also agree that a public censure is a reasonable and appropriate sanction under the circumstances presented here. See, e.g.,, In re Gonzalez, 773 A.2d 1026 (D.C. 2001). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Billy L. Ponds be, and hereby is, publicly censured.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
