Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta In re Knoll 181 A.D.2d 136

← Cases

In re Knoll

181 A.D.2d 136 Court Fourth Department, Decision date 1992-07-14 English

Contents

Majority

p. 136
In the Matter of David R. Knoll, an Attorney, Respondent.
Fourth Department,
July 14, 1992
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Gerard M. LaRusso (Vincent L. Scarsella of counsel), for Office of Grievance Committees.
Harold J. Boreanaz for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

On March 2, 1992, in the United States District Court for

p. 137
the Western District of New York, at Buffalo, the respondent was convicted, upon a jury verdict, of filing false statements in a bankruptcy proceeding and making a false statement to the Department of Justice in violation of 18 USC §§ 152 and 1001.

We find that the Federal felonies are essentially similar to New York Penal Law § 175.35, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, a class E felony. Both the Federal statute and the New York statute require presentation of a false instrument to a branch of government, knowing the instrument to be false, with the intent to defraud the government (see, Matter of Bejasa, 165 AD2d 397 ; Matter of Connery, 157 AD2d 12 ; see generally, Matter of Johnston, 75 NY2d 403 ).

Pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a) and (e), the respondent ceased to be an attorney and counselor-at-law upon his conviction of a felony (see, Matter of Napoli, 177 AD2d 135 ). Accordingly, respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law.

Boomer, J. P., Pine, Balio, Lawton and Boehm, JJ., concur.

Order of disbarment entered pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a), (e).

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited