In re Meade
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. 22-BG-0826 IN RE MARLON G. MEADE, RESPONDENT. A Suspended Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 981550) On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility (DDN: 2022-D150) (Decided March 23, 2023) Before MCLEESE, HOWARD, and ALIKHAN, Associate Judges. PER CURIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that respondent Marlon G. Meade be disbarred from the practice of law because Mr. Meade was convicted of conspiracy to commit offenses including mail fraud. D.C. Code § 11-2503(a) requires disbarment upon conviction of a crime of moral turpitude. This court has previously concluded that conspiracy to commit mail fraud is a crime of moral turpitude per se. In re Allison, 990 A.2d 467, 468 (D.C. 2010) (per curiam). 2 Mr. Meade has not filed any exception to the Board’s Report and Recommendation, nor did he file the required D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit after this court imposed an interim suspension on October 28, 2022. Under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(h)(2), “if no exceptions are filed to the Board’s report, the [c]ourt 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) (per curiam) (“When . . . there are no exceptions to the Board’s report and recommendation, our deferential standard of review becomes even more deferential.”). We accept the recommendation that Mr. Meade be disbarred. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Marlon G. Meade is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in this jurisdiction. Mr. Meade’s attention is directed to the requirements of D.C. Bar. R. IX, § 14, and their effect on eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar. R. IX, § 16(c).
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.
