A.Decisions subject to review. There are three methods for seeking review by the Supreme Court of a recommendation or decision of the Disciplinary Board entered pursuant to Rule 17-315 NMRA:(1) if the decision recommends public censure by the Supreme Court, suspension, disbarment, probation by the Supreme Court, restitution by the respondent-attorney, reinstatement after suspension or disbarment or denial of reinstatement after suspension or disbarment, a respondent-attorney or disciplinary counsel may request a hearing before the Supreme Court by filing a request for hearing with the clerk of the Supreme Court within fifteen (15) days of service of the decision and recommendations of the Disciplinary Board on the party requesting the hearing which the court, in its discretion, may grant; (2) if the decision of the board is to assess costs, to impose a formal public reprimand by the board, to issue an informal admonition to the respondent-attorney, or to impose or terminate probation previously ordered by the Board, within fifteen (15) days of service of the decision, the respondent-attorney or disciplinary counsel may petition the Supreme Court for a hearing, which the Court, in its discretion, may grant. The petition must allege one of the following: (a) the decision of the Disciplinary Board is in conflict with a decision of the Supreme Court;(b) a significant question of law is involved;(c) there is no substantial evidence in the record to support a material finding of fact upon which the decision of the Disciplinary Board is based; or(d) the petition involves an issue of substantial public interest that should be determined by the Supreme Court; or(3) if the decision of the board is to dismiss the charges, within fifteen (15) days of service of the decision, the respondent-attorney or disciplinary counsel may petition the Supreme Court for a hearing, which the Court, in its discretion, may grant. The petition must allege one or more of the following: (a) the decision of the Disciplinary Board is in conflict with a decision of the Supreme Court;(b) a significant question of law is involved;(c) there is no substantial evidence in the record to support a material finding of fact upon which the decision of the Disciplinary Board is based; or(d) the petition involves an issue of substantial public interest that should be determined by the Supreme Court.B.Procedure. If a hearing is held in accordance with this rule, the clerk of the Supreme Court shall notify the respondent-attorney and disciplinary counsel of the time and place of the hearing. Proper notice shall be presumed by mailing to the address on file in the Supreme Court office. Briefs shall be submitted only if requested by the Supreme Court. In this event, the clerk of the court will advise the parties of dates when their respective briefs must be submitted and the issues which are to be addressed. The form of any such briefs, including length limitations, shall be that which is prescribed by the Rules of Appellate Procedure.C.Failure to request a hearing. If, within fifteen (15) days from the date that the recommendations of the Disciplinary Board are served, a respondent-attorney or disciplinary counsel has not requested or petitioned for a hearing with the Supreme Court in accordance with this rule, and: (1) the recommendation is for public censure by the Supreme Court, suspension, disbarment, probation by the Supreme Court, or restitution by the respondent-attorney, the Supreme Court may issue a mandate accepting the recommendations of the Disciplinary Board or it may take such other action as it deems appropriate;(2) the decision is to impose a formal reprimand by the Disciplinary Board, issue an informal admonition to the respondent-attorney, or order probation by the Disciplinary Board, the Disciplinary Board may issue the admonition, publish the formal reprimand, or place the attorney on probation in accordance with its decision.D.Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court, in its discretion and under such conditions as it may specify, may: (1) reject any or all of the findings, conclusions or recommendations of the Disciplinary Board;(2) accept any or all of the findings and conclusions of the board;(3) impose the discipline recommended by the board or any other greater or lesser discipline that it deems appropriate under the circumstances including disbarment; or(4) impose probation or other conditions as a type of discipline by itself or may defer the effect of the discipline imposed.N.M. R. Gov. Disc. 17-316
As amended, effective 5/1/1986;4/12/2001; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 06-8300-032, effective 1/15/2007; by Supreme Court Order No. 10-8300-011, effective 3/3/2010; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-022, effective 12/31/2015. ANNOTATIONS The 2015 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-022, effective December 31, 2015, made review procedures applicable to certain additional recommendations or decisions of the Disciplinary Board; in Subparagraph A(1), after "disbarment", added "probation by the Supreme Court, restitution by the respondent-attorney"; in Subparagraph A(2), after "reprimand by the board", added "to issue an informal admonition to the respondent-attorney", and after "terminate probation", added "previously ordered by the Board"; in Subparagraph C(1), after "suspension", deleted "or", and after "disbarment", added "probation by the Supreme Court, or restitution by the respondent-attorney"; and in Subparagraph C(2), after the first occurrence of "Disciplinary Board", added "issue an informal admonition to the respondent-attorney", after "or", added "order", after "probation", added "by the Disciplinary Board", after "Disciplinary Board may", added "issue the admonition", and after "publish the", deleted "public" and added "formal". The 2010 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 10-8300-011, effective March 3, 2010, in Paragraph B, in the third sentence, after "form of any such briefs" added "including length limitations". The 2006 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 06-8300-032, effective January 15, 2007, revised Subparagraph (1) of Paragraph A to provide that an attorney may request a hearing before the Supreme Court if the decision of the Disciplinary Board recommends "reinstatement after suspension or disbarment or denial of reinstatement after suspension or disbarment". The 2001 amendment, effective April 12, 2001, added Paragraph A(3). Imposition of discipline greater than that recommended by board. - The Supreme Court exercised its authority pursuant to Paragraph D(3) to impose a period of actual suspension for intentional misconduct, since the hearing committee's recommended deferral of suspension did not serve the overriding public interest in the integrity of the system of justice. In re Lindsey, 1991-NMSC-047, 112 N.M. 17, 810 P.2d 1237. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - 7A C.J.S. Attorney and Client, §§ 109 to 115.