NOTICE OF REPRIMAND Case Nos. 93-142-GA; 94-38-GA Douglas Hamel, P-29768, Southgate, Michigan, by Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #28.
1) Reprimand; 2) Effective May 1, 1998. The Formal Complaints allege that respondent committed misconduct in his handling of 20 appointed criminal appellate matters and one personal injury/probate matter, and his failure to properly respond to three Requests for Investigation. The panel found that respondent failed to properly communicate with seven incarcerated complainants; failed to conduct prison visits with three incarcerated complainants; failed to timely recognize a conflict of interest regarding one incarcerated complainant; failed to file competent pleadings on behalf of one incarcerated complainant; made a false statement in his answer to one Request for Investigation; and failed to timely answer two Requests for Investigation. The remaining allegations were dismissed. Respondent's conduct was alleged to be in violation of MCR 9.103(C); MCR 9.104(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(c); 1.3; 1.4(a); 3.2; 3.4(c); 8.1(b); and 8.4(a) and (c). The panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $3,944.98.
One incarcerated complainant filed a petition for review, which was dismissed by the Attorney Discipline Board for his failure to file the required brief. The Board also concluded that the relief sought by the complainant, adjudication of specific procedural issues in the criminal matter, was not within the Board's jurisdiction. That complainant filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by the Board in an order entered August 28, 1998.
The complainant filed an application for leave to appeal, which was denied by the Michigan Supreme Court in an order entered April 27, 1999.