The Wyoming Supreme Court, in an August 26 ruling, agreed with a disciplined attorney that public censure, rather than revocation, was sufficient discipline for his driving while intoxicated offense, due to compelling mitigating factors (Board of Professional Responsibility v. Haderlie)
Nicholas T. Haderlie smashed his car into an airport fence, causing significant damage. According to court documents, Haderlie then left the scene and returned to his house. When law enforcement arrived at Haderlie’s residence, Haderlie was visibly intoxicated and instigated a physical altercation with the peace officers.
Haderlie was charged with driving while under the influence, leaving the scene of an accident, and interference with a peace officer, which Haderlie promptly reported to the State Bar.
Haderlie was also sentenced to 30 days in jail and two years of probation, and ordered to pay a fine for $11,730.07, which he complied with. Haderlie also checked himself into an alcohol rehabilitation clinic and made an apparent effort to become sober.
The state’s Board of Professional Responsibility, considering Haderlie’s efforts, agreed with his request to reduce the sanction to public censure.
The Supreme Court of Wyoming concurred with the state board’s decision to approve Haderlie’s stipulated motion for public censure, listing the aggravating and mitigating factors that led to its ruling,
“Aggravating factors included the presence of two misdemeanor offenses to which he pleaded guilty. Mitigating factors included the absence of a prior disciplinary record; timely good faith effort to make restitution or to rectify consequences of misconduct; full and free disclosure to Bar Counsel and a cooperative attitude toward proceedings; recovery from alcohol dependency as demonstrated by a meaningful and sustained period of successful rehabilitation; imposition of other penalties and sanctions; and remorse.”