Court Opinion: Presiding Disciplinary Judge Opinion for April 20

Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.

People v. Roger Daniel Morales


In November 2018, a client paid Roger Morales $410 to apply for a work permit in the client’s immigration case. Morales deposited the funds in his trust account but has no records showing what happened to the money afterward, nor does he recall what he did with the funds. Morales failed to obtain the documents required for the client’s work permit application, and he never submitted the application to immigration authorities, though he claimed he prepared the application. Even so, he told his client he sent the application.

On Feb. 20, 2019, Morales’s suspension in a different disciplinary case took effect, and Morales began working as a paralegal at another lawyer’s office. Morales didn’t notify the client in writing about his suspension. In September 2019, the client appeared for a cancellation of removal hearing, during which Morales told the client he was suspended and couldn’t represent them at the hearing. Morales told the client the lawyer Morales worked for would appear for the client. But Morales never obtained the client’s permission to share their confidential information with the lawyer, even though he provided the lawyer with the client’s file without their authorization. 

Given the impending hearing, the client felt they had no choice but to accept the lawyer’s representation. Morales then led his former client to believe his suspension would be over soon and he would be able to resume the representation in the near future. Throughout Morales’s suspension, he continued receiving payments from his former client for work performed by the other lawyer. Morales claimed he cashed those payments and paid the lawyer in cash, but Morales didn’t keep records of the alleged payments to the lawyer for the work.

The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved Morales’ stipulation to discipline and suspended him for two years. Morales’s suspension in this case takes effect May 25, though Morales has been suspended since February 2019 in a different case. Before Morales can seek reinstatement to the practice of law after his suspension in this case, he must prove by clear and convincing evidence that he has been rehabilitated, has complied with all disciplinary orders and rules and is fit to practice law. Morales must also pay $410 in restitution to his former client. 

Previous articleCourt Opinions: 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion for April 21
Next articleColorado AG’s Office Settles with Lender for Exceeding State Interest Rate Limits

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here