T. HAROLD WILLIAMS, PETITIONER,
v.
THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FLORIDA BAR, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
T. Harold Williams, disbarred for conspiracy and bribery while serving as a prosecutor, petitioned for reinstatement to the Florida Bar. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Board of Governors' denial of reinstatement, finding that Williams had not adequately demonstrated rehabilitation of the character defect that led to his criminal conduct.
The Court affirmed the Board of Governors' denial of reinstatement, holding that Williams had not adequately cured the fundamental character flaw demonstrated by his criminal conduct, and that the passage of time alone following his conviction and confession was insufficient to warrant reinstatement. However, the Court left open the possibility of future reinstatement after the expiration of two years under Integration Rule 11.10(12).
“To our minds there is a basic imperfection in the character of a man posing as an honorable member of the profession and sworn before God well and faithfully to perform his duties as a prosecutor who "sells out" to the criminal element he is bound to police.”
Establishes the Court's view that accepting bribes as a prosecutor represents a fundamental character defect, not merely a mistake.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams was convicted of conspiracy to thwart the prosecution of gamblers while serving as both a member of the Bar and Prosecuting Attorney. He plea…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney Reinstatement cases and more on FLexlaw
There seems to be no point of law in this case that warrants discussion and decision, therefore, no occasion for an opinion which would only serve to record in the Southern Reporter the misdeeds of the petitioner for which he now says he is sorry.
A number of prominent people in the community, including two ministers, a bank president, several members of the Bar, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, the Superintendent of Schools, and a Judge of the Criminal Court indicated that Williams since his disbarment had made a diligent effort to rehabilitate himself and deserved reinstatement.
On the other hand, the present president of the Bar Association and his two predecessors, the prosecuting attorney and the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar have taken a strong position against reinstatement. Moreover, the referee, a former judge of long experience and impeccable reputation, after extensive hearing and thorough study, stated he could not recommend reinstatement.
The petitioner was convicted of a conspiracy to thwart the prosecution of gamblers while he occupied a position of trust both as a member of the Bar and as Prosecuting Attorney. He pleaded guilty and served 10 months of a sentence of one year.
To our minds there is a basic imperfection in the character of a man posing as an honorable member of the profession and sworn before God well and faithfully to perform his duties as a prosecutor who “sells out” to the criminal element he is bound to police.
Bribery is an ugly word and the well deserved stigma that attaches to one who admits the offense cannot, and should not, be easily dissipated.
We do not think he has cured the flaw in his character by the mere passage of time after he has been caught and has confessed.
We affirm the order of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, adopt such judgment as the judgment of this Court and leave the petitioner to continue his existence beyond the aegis of The Florida Bar without prejudice, however, to his right to apply for reinstatement after the expiration of two years as provided under Integration Rule 11.10(12), 31 F.S.A.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, THORNAL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Fla. BAR RE Ronald E. KAY, 576 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1991)…t psychological difficulties existed previously and contributed to the past criminal misconduct for which he resigned. We find that on this record it is in the public’s best interest to deny readmittance at this time. Williams v. Board of Governors, 173 So. 2d 686 (Fla.1965). Accordingly, the recommendation of the referee is disapproved. Judgment for costs in the amount of $5,238.75 is hereby entered against Ronald E. Kay, for which sum let execution issue. It is so ordered. SHAW, C.J., OVERTON, McDONALD,…
-
Petition of Joseph L. Wolf, 257 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 1972)…thout merit, for the Referee may properly consider the prior disciplinary record of one seeking to be reinstated to The Florida Bar, including the number, similarity and gravity of his offenses. See Williams v. Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, 173 So. 2d 686 (Fla.1965). Article XI, Rule 11.11(5) specifically provides that “the matter to be investigated and decided shall be the fitness of the petitioner to resume the practice of law.” The Integration Rule at every turn places emphasis upon the protecti…