Eureka, CA 95501-0313
25 July 2011 | Active (13 years, 9 months ago) |
---|---|
17 April 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 09-C-13147 |
23 July 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 9 months ago) Interim suspension after conviction 09-C-13147 |
8 June 2010 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 09-C-13147 (14 years, 11 months ago) |
29 August 1991 | Active (33 years, 8 months ago) |
1 May 1991 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (34 years ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 90-O-11538 |
10 April 1990 | Active (35 years, 1 month ago) |
27 June 1983 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (41 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
11 November 1982 | Active (42 years, 6 months ago) |
28 June 1982 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (42 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
15 January 1970 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (55 years, 4 months ago) |
April 17, 2011 KENNETH MELVIN BAREILLES [#44816], 69, of Eureka was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on five years of probation with a one-year actual suspension and until he makes restitution, and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. If the suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. He received credit for an interim suspension that began July 23, 2010. The order took effect April 17, 2011. In 2009, Bareilles pleaded guilty to making an unlawful land sales transaction, a felony. Beginning in 1992, he illegally subdivided and sold 33 parcels of a large tract of land he owned in Humboldt County. By the time he was prosecuted in 2008, the statute of limitations had expired for most of the transactions.Some of the individuals who bought the land grew marijuana and did not obtain permits for structures they built or roads they graded.After Bareilles’ conviction, he was placed on interim suspension by the bar and ordered to comply with rule 9.20. Although he filed a compliance affidavit, he indicated he still had one client file belonging to belonging to a pro per client in Europe for whom he had not been able to find another lawyer. The affidavit was rejected.He stipulated that his conviction warranted discipline although it did not entail moral turpitude, and he failed to comply with rule 9.20.Bareilles was disciplined in 1991 for the unlawful practice of law. In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and he submitted evidence of his good character from people who have known him for many years. |