AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• Attorney Albert Costales, while serving as a defense attorney in three separate criminal cases involving the same female prosecutor, engaged in conduct that was deemed disrespectful and disruptive. This included making demeaning remarks towards the prosecutor, arguing with the judge, and sending an inappropriate email to the prosecutor. His actions led to a disciplinary complaint being filed against him.

Procedural History

• September 7, 2022: The Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the New Mexico Supreme Court Disciplinary Board brought formal charges against Respondent (para 6).
• January 5, 2023: A hearing on the merits was held by the Hearing Committee of the Disciplinary Board (para 6).
• February 15, 2023: The hearing committee issued its proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation for discipline (para 6).
• May 1, 2023: The panel of the Disciplinary Board issued its decision, approving the hearing committee’s findings and recommendation for discipline (para 11).
• August 18, 2023: The Supreme Court of New Mexico accepted the panel’s decision and approved its recommendation of discipline (para 12).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner: Argued that Respondent's conduct was disrespectful and disruptive, violating multiple Rules of Professional Conduct, and recommended discipline including a two-year indefinite and deferred suspension with terms, and public censure (paras 1, 8-9).
• Respondent: Accepted responsibility for his actions, admitted his behavior was inappropriate, and agreed on the need for professional mental health assistance. He attributed his behavior to personal problems and his zealous personality (para 7).

Legal Issues

• Whether Respondent's conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct.
• What is the appropriate level of discipline for Respondent's misconduct?

Disposition

• Respondent Albert Costales is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law for a minimum period of two years, with the suspension deferred. He is placed on probation for the entire period of deferred suspension, subject to specific conditions including counseling and continuing legal education (CLE) requirements. Additionally, Respondent is publicly censured (paras 22-24).

Reasons

• Per C. Shannon Bacon, Chief Justice, Michael E. Vigil, Justice, David K. Thomson, Justice, Julie J. Vargas, Justice, Briana H. Zamora, Justice:
  The Court found that Respondent's conduct violated several Rules of Professional Conduct by disrespecting the prosecutor and the judge, and engaging in behavior intended to disrupt tribunal proceedings. The Court considered Respondent's acceptance of responsibility and remorse as mitigating factors. However, given Respondent's history of similar misconduct, the Court emphasized the importance of civility in the legal profession and the need for specific counseling to address Respondent's behavior. The decision to defer suspension and place Respondent on probation was influenced by the hope for his full rehabilitation and the unique circumstances of his case, including his personal distress and previous insufficient rehabilitative efforts (paras 1-24).