Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Brett R. Blomme
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2022 WI 80 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2022AP998-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Brett R. Blomme, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Brett R. Blomme, Respondent. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST BLOMME OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: November 25, 2022 SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: Per Curiam. ZIEGLER, C.J., filed a concurring opinion, in which REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY, HAGEDORN, and KAROFSKY, JJ., joined. ROGGENSACK, J., filed a concurring opinion in which REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY and KAROFSKY, JJ., joined. NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: 2022 WI 80 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2022AP998-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Brett R. Blomme, Attorney at Law: FILED Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, NOV 25, 2022 v. Sheila T. Reiff Clerk of Supreme Court Brett R. Blomme, Respondent. ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license revoked. ¶1 petition PER CURIAM. for the Attorney Brett consensual R. revocation Blomme of has his filed license a to practice law in Wisconsin pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.19. Attorney Blomme's petition states that he cannot successfully defend against an Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) investigation conviction, felonies; of professional entered following namely, two a counts misconduct guilty of related plea, of to two distribution pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(2). his federal of child Attorney No. 2022AP998-D Blomme's petition attaches the OLR's summary of misconduct being investigated. documents, The OLR's misconduct summary attaches a number of including a copy of Attorney Blomme's federal sentencing transcript. ¶2 Attorney Blomme was admitted to the practice of law in Wisconsin in 2010. He has not previously been the subject of professional discipline. However, his law license is currently administratively suspended for failure to pay state bar dues and failure to comply with trust account certification requirements. The OLR also sought and obtained a summary suspension of Attorney Blomme's law license in early 2022, as described in more detail below. ¶3 file of According the to information proceedings in this obtained matter, from the the CCAP court's and WSCCA websites,1 and the materials attached to the OLR's misconduct summary, in March 2021, the State filed a criminal complaint against Attorney Blomme alleging that he possessed child pornography during a time period in which he served as a judge in the Children's Division of Milwaukee County Circuit Court ("Children's criminal complaint, prohibiting circuit Court"). Attorney court judge On this the court Blomme and same from day issued the an exercising temporarily State order the withholding filed the temporarily powers his of a judicial salary, effective the date of the order and until further order CCAP is an acronym for Wisconsin's Consolidated Court Automation Programs. WSCCA is an acronym for Wisconsin Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Access. These government websites reflect information entered by court staff. 1 2 No. of the court. 2022AP998-D See Wis. Const. art. VII, § 3(1) (conferring this court with superintending and administrative authority over all courts in the state). ¶4 In May 2021, Attorney Blomme was charged in federal court with two counts of distributing child pornography. later pled guilty to both counts. Blomme was months in convicted prison on and each In December 2021, Attorney sentenced count, He in to federal be served followed by 20 years of supervised release. court to 108 concurrently, According to CCAP records, shortly after Attorney Blomme's federal conviction and sentencing, the state charges against Attorney Blomme were dismissed. ¶5 In January 2022, the OLR moved under SCR 22.20 for a summary suspension of Attorney Blomme's Wisconsin law license based on his federal conviction. On February 16, 2022, this court granted the motion and suspended Attorney Blomme's law license until further order of the court. In May 2022, this court found good cause to continue this summary suspension. See SCR 22.20(6) (providing that, within two months of the effective date of a summary suspension, the OLR is required to either file a disciplinary suspension complaint should or show continue). cause Attorney why Blomme's the law summary license remains suspended. ¶6 According to the OLR's misconduct summary, the OLR has concluded that Attorney Blomme's conduct leading to his federal conviction for SCR 20:8.4(b). distributing child pornography violated See id. (providing that "[i]t is professional 3 No. 2022AP998-D misconduct for a lawyer to commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects"). ¶7 In his petition for consensual revocation, Attorney Blomme asserts that he is seeking the consensual revocation of his license freely, voluntarily, and knowingly. He states that he cannot successfully defend himself against the allegations of misconduct set forth above and more fully described in the OLR's summary. contest He understands that he is giving up his right to the summary. allegations referenced in the OLR's misconduct He acknowledges that if the court grants the petition and revokes his license, he will be subject to the requirements of SCR 22.26 and, should he ever wish to seek the reinstatement of his license, the reinstatement procedure set forth in SCRs 22.29-22.33. He acknowledges that he is represented by counsel in this disciplinary matter. ¶8 The OLR has filed a recommendation on Attorney Blomme's petition for consensual license revocation. The OLR notes that Attorney Blomme was serving as a Milwaukee County Children's Court judge at the time of the misconduct; that his crimes were "extraordinarily serious, by their nature and by virtue of the position Blomme held"; and that "his misconduct brought tremendous disrepute to the legal profession and the courts." The OLR states that revocation is warranted and petition for necessary. ¶9 Having consensual reviewed revocation, the Attorney OLR's 4 Blomme's misconduct summary, and the No. 2022AP998-D OLR's recommendation on Attorney Blomme's petition, we accept Attorney Blomme's petition for the consensual revocation of his Wisconsin law license. We note that, according to the federal sentencing transcript attached to the OLR's misconduct summary, the sentencing judge described some of the child pornography involved in Attorney Blomme's case as "the worst of the worst." The judge also noted that Attorney Blomme's wrongdoing "wasn't just the possession" but also "the selection and distribution of particularly virulent child pornography." The judge also voiced concern that Attorney Blomme "committed [his] crimes in part at the courthouse" where he was responsible for cases involving children who had been abused. The judge described Attorney Blomme's behavior as "a huge stain on the reputation of the judiciary." ¶10 so This is clearly the type of criminal conduct that "is revealing of character defects, and so undermines public confidence in the legal profession, that it necessarily reflects adversely on an attorney's fitness as a lawyer." See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Johns, 2014 WI 32, ¶38, 353 Wis. 2d 746, 847 N.W.2d 179, citing In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Inglimo, 2007 WI 126, ¶51, 305 Wis. 2d 71, 740 N.W.2d 125 (attorney's illegal drug use with clients showed "a disregard for the law" that "reflect[ed] adversely not only on the lawyer's fitness, but on the profession as a whole"). The seriousness of Attorney Blomme's criminal conduct in distributing child pornography is magnified by the fact that it occurred during a time in which he served as a circuit court 5 No. judge——a Children's Court judge, no less. 2022AP998-D Public trust in our court system depends upon public trust in the integrity of its judges. the Attorney Blomme's blatant disregard for the law during time he sat on the judicial bench jeopardizes public confidence in the courts and reflects adversely on the entire bar. See In Wis. 2d 405, seriousness re Disciplinary 406, of a 548 Proceedings N.W.2d 526 district (1996) attorney's Against Penn, 201 (noting that the use was illegal drug "exacerbated by the fact that it occurred in the context of his official position as district attorney, a position of public trust in the legal system to which the people of his county elected him," and thereby "caused significant and unjustified damage to the public's perception of the integrity of law enforcement personnel throughout the county.") ¶11 Given the egregious nature of Attorney Blomme's misconduct, anything less than a revocation of his law license would unduly depreciate the seriousness of his misconduct, fail to protect the public and the court system from further misconduct, and inadequately deter similar misbehavior by other attorneys. ¶12 Revocation is clearly deserved.2 Because this matter is being resolved via a petition for consensual revocation without the need to appoint a referee or hold an extensive hearing, we do not impose costs on Attorney Blomme. No restitution was sought and none is ordered. Although three justices join the concurrence authored by Chief Justice Ziegler, that fact does not effect a change to our current rule governing license revocation. See SCR 22.29(2). 2 6 No. ¶13 2022AP998-D IT IS ORDERED that the petition for consensual license revocation is granted. ¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the license of Brett R. Blomme to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this order. ¶15 already IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not done so, Brett R. Blomme shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked. ¶16 IT suspension of IS FURTHER Brett R. ORDERED Blomme's that license the to administrative practice law in Wisconsin, due to his failure to pay state bar dues and failure to comply with trust account certification requirements, will remain in effect until each reason for the administrative suspension has been rectified pursuant to SCR 22.28(1). 7 No. ¶17 ANNETTE KINGSLAND ZIEGLER, C.J. 2022AP998-D.akz (concurring). I concur in the court's order revoking Attorney Blomme's license to practice law in Wisconsin. I write separately to point out that in Wisconsin the "revocation" of an attorney's law license is not truly revocation because the attorney may petition for reinstatement after a period of five years. See SCR 22.29(2). The facts of this case demonstrate the kind of lawyer conduct that warrants revocation, with no ability to seek reinstatement. I believe that when it comes to lawyer discipline, courts should say what they mean and mean what they say. We should not be creating false perceptions to both the public and to the lawyer seeking to practice law again. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Moodie, 2020 WI 39, 391 Wis. 2d 196, 942 N.W.2d 302 (Ziegler, J., dissenting). And, as I stated in my dissent to this court's order denying Rule Petition 19-10, In the Matter of Amending Supreme Court Rules Pertaining to Permanent Revocation of a License to Practice Law in Attorney Disciplinary Proceedings, I believe there may be rare and unusual cases that would warrant the permanent revocation of an attorney's license to practice law. See S. Ct. Order 19-10 (issued Dec. 18, 2019) (Ziegler, J., dissenting). ¶18 For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully concur. ¶19 I am authorized to state that Justices REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY, BRIAN HAGEDORN, and JILL concurrence. 1 J. KAROFSKY join this No. ¶20 PATIENCE DRAKE ROGGENSACK, J. 2022AP998-D.pdr (concurring). I agree with the court's decision today to revoke the law license of Brett R. Blomme. I write separately to address my concern over the lack of action taken by the Judicial Commission. ¶21 In our decision today, the court notes in closing what we do and do not decide. Attorney Blomme is before us only as a member of the bar, not as a judicial officer who presided in children's court. He committed criminal misconduct involving child pornography while he held judicial office, and acted, in part, from within the courthouse itself. Although today we revoke Attorney Blomme's law license, it causes me to pause and consider the lack of action by the Judicial Commission. ¶22 Blomme was arrested on March 16, 2021, and did not formally resign his seat on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court until much later, on September 1, 2021. In all that time, the Judicial Commission took no public action. ¶23 Over 600 days have passed since Blomme was arrested at his residence and taken into custody on March 16, 2021. Blomme was formally charged in Dane County Circuit Court with seven felony counts of possession of child pornography on March 17, 2021 (Dane County Case No. 2021CF647). Blomme made his initial appearance in Dane County Circuit Court on March 17, when he was released on signature bond. ¶24 Also on March 17, 2021, this court took immediate action and issued an order "temporarily prohibit[ing]" Blomme from exercising the powers of a circuit court judge in the State of Wisconsin and temporarily withholding 1 his judicial salary No. "effective court." [March 17, 2021] and until further 2022AP998-D.pdr order of the The Judicial Commission took no public action. ¶25 About two months later, on May 12, 2021, Blomme was indicted on federal charges. felony child States v. pornography Blomme, The federal indictment set out two distribution No. 21-cr-49-jdp charges. (W.D. See United Wis.). He was arraigned in federal court on May 19, 2021, and was ordered to be detained and taken into federal custody. Still, the Judicial Commission took no public action. ¶26 Nearly four months after the federal indictment, and nearly six months after the state charges were filed in Dane County Circuit Court, on September 1, 2021, Blomme formally resigned his seat on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court. that month, on September 28, 2021, Blomme (while Later still in federal custody) entered guilty pleas to two counts of felony child pornography distribution in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. On December 22, 2021, prison count, Blomme to was be sentenced served to 108 concurrently, months in followed by 20 on each years of supervised release. ¶27 Under Blomme's plea agreement, the Dane County case was dismissed after he was sentenced in federal court. The Judicial Commission took no action. ¶28 passed As from Notably, no stated the earlier, date public Blomme action it was was 2 appears arrested ever over in taken 600 days have March of 2021. by the Judicial No. Commission. 2022AP998-D.pdr The Judicial Commission protects the public. I am concerned by their inaction. ¶29 I am authorized to state that Justices REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY and JILL J. KAROFSKY join this concurrence. 3 No. 1 2022AP998-D.pdr
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.
