San Diego, CA 92126-4515
5 April 2023 | Active (2 years, 1 month ago) |
---|---|
30 August 2014 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (10 years, 8 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 12-O-17263 |
11 December 2013 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 12-O-17263 (11 years, 5 months ago) |
8 August 2013 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (11 years, 9 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 09-O-13903 |
17 March 2011 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 09-O-13903 (14 years, 1 month ago) |
24 June 2003 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (21 years, 10 months ago) |
August 30, 2014 STEVEN ANTHONY GUILIN [#225982], 46, of San Diego, was suspended from the practice of law for 10 months and ordered to take the MPRE, make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. He was also placed on two years’ probation and faces a two-year suspension if he does not comply with the terms of his probation. The order took effect Aug. 30, 2014. Guilin stipulated to misconduct in two matters, including committing moral turpitude and failing to perform legal services with competence, promptly release client papers and property or return unearned fees.In the first matter, Guilin failed to file the necessary documents and witness affidavits by deadline to prevent the immigration court from ordering the 30-day voluntary departure of two of his clients. To correct the problem, Guilin filed documents with the court indicating that the clients had a new attorney and requesting to reopen their matters. The document appeared to bear the signature of the new attorney, but the attorney listed had not been in contact with either Guilin or the clients and did not give Guilin permission to sign his name.According to his stipulation, Guilin then asked the other attorney to take the blame for him, reasoning, “You are old, you can probably afford to retire. I have little kids at home, and this will destroy my marriage.â€In the second matter, Guilin agreed to handle his client’s immigration appeal but did not file the necessary brief, leading the Board of Immigration Appeals to affirm the decision of the immigration court and dismiss the appeal. After that happened, Guilin met with the client and told him he could appeal the matter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for an additional $3,500. The petition was dismissed in part and denied in part, and Guilin sent the client a letter informing him he still owned Guilin $2,200.Guilin did not provide any services of value to the client and has failed to repay him the unearned fees. He was ordered to pay $3,450 plus interest in restitution.In mitigation, he entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State Bar.Guilin had one prior record of discipline, a 2013 suspension for failing to promptly refund unearned fees or perform with competence and other acts of misconduct that constituted moral turpitude.August 8, 2013 STEVEN ANTHONY GUILIN [#225982], 45, of San Diego, was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years’ probation with an actual 10-month suspension and ordered to pay restitution, take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Aug. 8, 2013. Guilin stipulated to multiple acts of misconduct in two immigration cases, which included signing documents on behalf of two clients and another attorney without their knowledge. In one of the matters, Guilin was hired in 2008 by a woman to represent her incarcerated brother in his immigration case. The woman paid Guilin $1,500 and agreed to file a writ of habeas corpus on her brother’s behalf. Instead of filing the writ as the man’s attorney, Guilin filed it in pro per, did not give the client a chance to review the petition and signed the client’s name to it without his permission. After filing the petition, he took no other action on behalf of the client. Guilin never provided the client or his sister an accounting of the fees paid and did not earn all of the fees.In the other matter, a woman hired in Guilin in 2008 to represent her in removal proceedings but failed to meet the deadline for filing of relief applications, causing the judge to issue an order that the case be dismissed as abandoned. Guilin filed a motion to reopen the matter, using the name of an attorney who had no knowledge of the matter. Guilin also submitted a document indicating that the other attorney was now representing the client, and signed the client’s name to the document without the client’s knowledge.Guilin was found culpable of misconduct including moral turpitude, failure to return unearned fees, failure to perform legal services with competence, and seeking to mislead a judge. He was ordered to pay $2,250 plus interest in restitution.In mitigation, Guilin cooperated with the State Bar in its investigation and by entering into a stipulation. |