IN RE KELLY A. CROSS, RESPONDENT.
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. 10-BG-200 IN RE KELLY A. CROSS, RESPONDENT. A Suspended Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 500189) On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility (BDN-476-09) (Submitted March 6, 2017 Decided March 16, 2017) Before GLICKMAN, FISHER, and THOMPSON, Associate Judges. PER CURIAM: Respondent Kelly A. Cross pleaded guilty in 2009 to one count of misdemeanor video voyeurism in violation of D.C. Code § 22-3531 (c) (2012 Repl.), after he secretly taped a man who was undressing in the locker room of a gym. The Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”) determined that Mr. Cross had committed a crime of moral turpitude on the facts. The Board also found that Mr. Cross had violated Rules 8.4 (b) and 8.4 (c) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct. It recommends that Mr. Cross be disbarred pursuant to D.C. Code § 11-2503 (a) (2012 Repl.), which requires 2 disbarment when a member of the Bar is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.1 Under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9 (h)(2), “if no exceptions are filed to the Board’s report, the Court will enter an order imposing the discipline recommended by the Board upon the expiration of the time permitted for filing exceptions.” See also In re Viehe, 762 A.2d 542, 543 (D.C. 2000) (“When . . . there are no exceptions to the Board’s report and recommendation, our deferential standard of review becomes even more deferential.”). Neither Mr. Cross nor Disciplinary Counsel has filed an exception to the Board’s Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Kelly A. Cross is disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. We direct Mr. Cross’s attention to the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (relating to disbarred and suspended attorneys) and § 16 (relating to eligibility for reinstatement). So ordered. 1 Following the issuance of an order to show cause—to which Mr. Cross never responded—we suspended him from the practice of law in the District of Columbia pending final disposition of this proceeding.
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.
