in Re Richard R. Ryder, Appellant., 381 F.2d 713 (4th Cir. 1967)

Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (July 20, 1967)

Docket number: 11315


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/in-re-richard-ryder-appellant-36724805
Id. vLex: VLEX-36724805

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

Ohio Supreme Court - In re Original Grand Jury Investigation (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 544

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Charles Richard Cook, Appellant., 400 F.2d 877 (4th Cir. 1968)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Robert C. Glass, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louis B. Heyd, Criminal Sheriff of the Parish of Orleans, Respondent-Appellee., 457 F.2d 562 (5th Cir. 1972)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harry U. Scruggs, Sr., and Harry U. Scruggs, Jr., Defendants-Appellants., 549 F.2d 1097 (6th Cir. 1977)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - in the Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings. Frank J. Duffy, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 473 F.2d 840 (8th Cir. 1973)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - in the Matter of Richard A. Thalheim, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant., 853 F.2d 383 (5th Cir. 1988)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - in Re January 1976 Grand Jury. Edward M. Genson, Attorney At Law, Witness-Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 534 F.2d 719 (7th Cir. 1976)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hakeem Abdul Rasheed, Aka Clifford Jones, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Janice Phillips, Defendant-Appellant., 663 F.2d 843 (9th Cir. 1981)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Cir. - Collins Securities Corporation and Timothy Collins, Petitioners, v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Respondent., 562 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1977)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - William R. Burkett Et Al., Appellants, Petitioners, v. Stephen S. Chandler, United States District Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma, Respondent. David Hall and Jo Evans Hall, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. William R. Burkett, United States Attorney for the Western District Ofoklahoma, and Clyde L. Bickerstaff, Oklahoma District Director, Internalrevenue Service, Defendants-Appellants., 505 F.2d 217 (10th Cir. 1975) Appellants, Petitioners, v. Stephen S. Chandler, United States District Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma, Respondent. David Hall and Jo Evans Hall, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. William R. Burkett, United States Attorney for the Western District Ofoklahoma, and Clyde L. Bickerstaff, Oklahoma District Director, Internalrevenue Service, Defendants-Appellants.

Text:

Edward A. Marks, Jr., and David J. Mays, Richmond, Va. (Leith S. Bremner, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellant.

C. V. Sprately, Jr., U.S. Atty. (Samuel W. Phillips and John D. Schmidtlein, Asst. U.S. Attys., on brief), for the United States.

Before SOBELOFF, BOREMAN and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is the appeal of Richard R. Ryder from an order by the Judges of the Eastern District of Virginia, sitting en banc, adjudging him guilty of unprofessional conduct and suspending him from practice before that court for a period of 18 months.

The essential facts are not in dispute. In the course of his representation of an individual suspected of bank robbery, ryder transferred from that person's safe deposit box to his own, stolen money and a sawed-off shotgun, in violation of state and federal law. At least one purpose, avowed by Ryder, was to conceal the articles and thereby avoid the presumption of guilt which would arise if the money and the weapon were found in the client's possession. Viewed in any light, the facts furnished no basis for the assertion of an attorney-client privilege. It is an abuse of a lawyer's professional responsibility knowingly to take possession of and secrete the fruits and instrumentaties of a crime. Ryder's acts bear no reasonable relation to the privilege and duty to refuse to divulge a client's confidential communication. Ryder made himself an active participant in a criminal act, ostensibly wearing the mantle of the loyal advocate, but in reality serving as accessory after the fact.

We have carefully considered the exculpatory arguments made in Ryder's behalf in the District Court and again advanced on appeal. They have all been dealt with thoroughly and satisfactorily in the District Court's opinion,263 F.Supp. 360 (E.D.Va.1967), and there is no need for elaborate repetition. The District Court's opinion is adopted as our own and its judgment, which we think lenient in the circumstances, is affirmed.

Having reached this conclusion on the complete record, briefs and arguments, we can do no less than suspend Ryder from practice before this court for the duration of his suspension from the District Court. It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access