Mikel Peter Eggert v. State


Opinion issued February 25, 2020 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-19-00429-CV ——————————— MIKEL PETER EGGERT, Appellant V. THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 425th Judicial District Court Williamson County, Texas1 Trial Court Case No. 18-1326-C425 OPINION 1 The Texas Supreme Court transferred this appeal from the Court of Appeals for the Third District of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 73.001 (authorizing transfer of cases between courts of appeals). This is an appeal from an order denying Mikel Peter Eggert’s petition to reinstate his license to practice law in the State of Texas. We affirm. Background Criminal Conviction, Suspension, and Disbarment Eggert was licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania and the Northern District of Texas in 2004. The following year, Eggert moved to Texas and worked with his father at his father’s law practice. A jury found Eggert guilty of a state jail felony for conspiring to tamper with or fabricate physical evidence. See TEX. PENAL CODE § 37.09. The trial court sentenced Eggert to five years’ probation. Eggert appealed his conviction, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.2 The Texas Board of Disciplinary Appeals suspended Eggert’s license to practice law. Later, the Texas Board of Disciplinary Appeals disbarred Eggert as a result of his felony conviction. Eggert has not practiced law since December 2005. In March 2013, Eggert completed probation. Petition to Reinstate Eggert’s License to Practice Law In 2018, Eggert filed a verified petition to reinstate his license to practice law in the State of Texas. See TEX. R. DISCIPLINARY P. 11.02. The trial court held a bench trial on Eggert’s petition. Eggert called four character witnesses and one 2 See Eggert v. State, No. 11-05-00227-CR, 2007 WL 1644061 (Tex. App.— Eastland June 7, 2007, pet. ref’d) (per curiam, not designated for publication). 2 expert witness to testify about his character, conduct, and skills as an attorney. Eggert also testified. The State Bar of Texas did not call any witnesses to testify. After the bench trial, the trial court denied Eggert’s petition for reinstatement. Eggert requested findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the trial court requested from each party proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Eggert and the State Bar of Texas complied. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law The trial court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law. The findings of fact that Eggert does not dispute follow. The Board of Disciplinary Appeals did not find that Eggert had caused any financial loss to any person or entity. The Board of Disciplinary Appeals assessed no fines or costs against Eggert as part of “the Attorney Disciplinary Action.” Eggert was not the subject of any action in which restitution was ordered. Eggert has never been a defendant in a criminal case other than the case that led to his disbarment. Finally, no formal or informal allegations or charges of fraud have been made against Eggert since his ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals