Lake Forest, CA 92630
21 June 2012 | Disbarred (12 years, 10 months ago) Disbarment 08-C-10826 |
---|---|
4 December 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 5 months ago) Ordered inactive 08-C-10826 |
25 June 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 10 months ago) Interim suspension after conviction 10-C-03556 |
25 June 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 10 months ago) Interim suspension after conviction 10-C-03557 |
28 May 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 11 months ago) Interim suspension after conviction 08-C-10826 |
5 May 2010 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 10-C-03556 (15 years ago) |
30 April 2010 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 10-C-03557 (15 years ago) |
19 March 2010 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 08-C-10826 (15 years, 1 month ago) |
1 December 2000 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (24 years, 5 months ago) |
June 21, 2012 NATHAN JOSEPH SHERIDAN [#208940], 39, of Lake Forest was disbarred June 21, 2012, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Sheridan has been convicted three times of petty theft and related crimes. In addition, he testified during trial that since the last of the three convictions, he was convicted four more times for petty theft. The crimes involve moral turpitude.The three convictions were the result of shoplifting from Target, CVS and Costco stores. As part of a plea agreement, Sheridan was to participate in the Orange County Superior Court’s Recovery Court Program. However, he violated the program rules by discontinuing his medication for more than five months; as a result he was unable to control his conduct and again began to shoplift.In recommending Sheridan’s disbarment, State Bar Court Judge Donald Miles said his “sustained history of stealing represents conduct and ethics antithetical to the values required and expected of an attorney.†Although Sheridan says he is on the road to recovery, Miles wrote, “To protect the profession, he must be required to show that he has lived an exemplary life for a sustained period of time without the constraints of the oversight by his probation officer and the criminal courts.†|