State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Boose

cases determined
in the
sUPreme coUrt of neBrasKa
()
State of NebraSka ex rel . C ouNSel for D iSCipliNe
of the NebraSka Supreme C ourt, relator , v.
William r. booSe iii, reSpoNDeNt.
759 n.W.2d 0
filed January 6, 2009. 	no. s-07-923.
. Disciplinary Proceedings. the issues in a disciplinary proceeding against a law-
yer are whether the nebraska supreme court should impose discipline and, if so,
the type of discipline appropriate under the circumstances.
2. Disciplinary Proceedings: States: Proof. in a reciprocal discipline proceeding,
a judicial determination of attorney misconduct in one jurisdiction is generally
conclusive proof of guilt and is not subject to relitigation in the second jurisdic-
tion; however, the nebraska supreme court is entitled to independently assess the
facts and independently determine the appropriate disciplinary action against the
attorney in this state.
3. Disciplinary Proceedings. When determining the proper discipline of an attor-
ney, the nebraska supreme court considers an attorney’s acts both underlying the
offense and throughout the disciplinary proceeding.
4. Rules of the Supreme Court: Attorneys at Law: Convictions. an attorney
who has been convicted of a felony has breached his or her oath of office as an
attorney and the nebraska rules of Professional conduct.
original action. Judgment of disbarment.
John 	W. 	steele, 	assistant 	counsel 	for 	discipline, 	for
relator.
Kevin 	P. 	tynan, 	of 	richardson 	& 	tynan, 	P.L.c., 	and
richard L. halbert, of halbert, dunn & halbert, L.L.c., for
respondent.
heaviCaN, 	C.J., 	Wright, 	C oNNolly, 	gerrarD, 	StephaN,
mCC ormaCk , and miller-lermaN, JJ.
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
11/01/2026 04:50 AM CST

per C uriam .
sUmmary
in this reciprocal attorney discipline case, counsel for
discipline, the relator, asks us to discipline William r. Boose
iii, a member of the nebraska state Bar association. in July
2007, Boose pleaded guilty to violating 8 U.s.c. § 4 (2006)
in the U.s. district court for the southern district of florida.
his crime was a federal felony offense. Because of his felony
conviction, the florida supreme court suspended him from
the practice of law for 3 years. Boose notified the nebraska
counsel for discipline of his conviction, and the relator now
seeks reciprocal discipline against Boose under neb. ct. r.
§ 3-32.
C rimiNal aCtS leaDiNg to SuSpeNSioN
Boose was admitted to the practice of law in florida on
november 0, 969, and in nebraska on July 27, 970. Boose
has maintained his membership in the nebraska state Bar
association. his practice in florida focuses on land use and
zoning laws.
Boose’s guilty plea provides the following facts regarding
his conviction: Boose was an attorney who specialized in land
use and zoning laws. he regularly appeared before the Palm
Beach county Board of county commissioners in florida,
seeking approval of land use, zoning, and other real-estate-
related matters for his clients.
at the heart of the criminal prosecution was the sale of 3,500
acres of undeveloped land in martin county, florida, known as
nine Gems. in august 2002, anthony masilotti, a member
of the Palm Beach county Board of county commissioners,
retained Boose to purchase a 50-acre tract of nine Gems. to
facilitate the purchase, Boose created a florida land trust, nam-
ing a Boose law firm employee to act as trustee. masilotti’s
then-wife was the sole beneficiary of the trust.
after he purchased the land, masilotti used his position
as a public official to pursue the purchase of the entire nine
Gems land by the south florida Water management district.
he did not disclose that he had a financial interest in the
land. the district ultimately purchased nine Gems in october
2 	277 neBrasKa rePorts

2004, including the land owned by masilotti. the district paid
masilotti $.7 million by wire transfer for the sale of his hold-
ings within nine Gems.
in march 2004, before the closing on the sale, Boose became
aware that masilotti misused his public position to advance
and leverage the sale of nine Gems. But Boose did not make
masilotti’s self-dealing known to the authorities. the govern-
ment later charged Boose with having knowledge of the actual
commission of a felony and failing to report it, in violation
of 8 U.s.c. § 4. Boose pleaded guilty and admitted that he
knew or should have known that masilotti had engaged in wire
fraud and that he failed to report it to the appropriate criminal
authorities. on January 25, 2008, the court sentenced Boose to
serve 24 months’ imprisonment, fined him $25,000, and placed
him on  year of supervised release. Boose also paid more than
$400,000 in restitution.
orDer of SuSpeNSioN by the
floriDa Supreme C ourt
the florida Bar association brought disciplinary proceed-
ings against Boose. a referee found that Boose violated two
rules: () committing an act that is unlawful or contrary to
honesty and justice and (2) committing a criminal act that
reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or
fitness as a lawyer. in florida, disbarment is the presumptive
sanction for a lawyer convicted of a felony; however, the ref-
eree made specific findings regarding mitigation. the referee
found that Boose had not been previously disciplined; he had
sought interim rehabilitation and shown remorse; other penal-
ties or sanctions, specifically the criminal sentence, had been
imposed; and the record reflected abundant evidence of Boose’s
good character and reputation. the referee noted that the char-
acter references submitted on Boose’s behalf showed that he is
a valued member of the florida bar and his community.
the florida supreme court approved the referee’s report
and suspended Boose from the practice of law for 3 years,
effective august 3, 2007. Because Boose is a member of the
 The Florida Bar v. Boose, no. sc07-406, 2008 WL 2262400 (fla. may
5, 2008) (unpublished disposition listed in table at 984 so. 2d 520).
state ex reL. coUnseL for dis. v. Boose 	3
cite as 277 neb. 

nebraska bar, the relator requests that reciprocal discipline be
imposed in the state of nebraska under § 3-32.
anaLysis
[,2] the issues in a disciplinary proceeding against a law-
yer are whether we should impose discipline and, if so, the
type of discipline appropriate under the circumstances.2 in a
reciprocal discipline proceeding, “‘a judicial determination of
attorney misconduct in one jurisdiction is generally conclusive
proof of guilt and is not subject to relitigation in the sec-
ond jurisdiction.’”3 although we are entitled to independently
assess the facts,4 we decline to do so when Boose has admitted
his guilt in committing a serious felony offense. Because Boose
has not alleged that he was deprived of due process of law in
the florida disciplinary proceedings, our review is limited to a
determination of the appropriate sanction.5
[3] By pleading guilty to the federal criminal charges, Boose
has admitted that he committed a criminal act that adversely
reflects on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a
lawyer, in violation of neb. ct. r. of Prof. cond. § 3-508.4(b).
the imposition of discipline is therefore appropriate. Under
neb. ct. r. § 3-304, we may consider and impose the follow-
ing public sanctions for attorney misconduct: () disbarment;
(2) suspension for a fixed period; (3) probation instead of or
after suspension, on such terms as the court may designate; (4)
censure and reprimand; or (5) temporary suspension.6 When
another jurisdiction has disciplined an attorney, we may enter
an order imposing the identical discipline, or greater or lesser
discipline, as we deem appropriate.7 When determining the
proper discipline of an attorney, we consider an attorney’s
2 see State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Finney, 276 neb. 94, 758 n.W.2d 622
(2008).
3 see State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline v. Rogers, 272 neb. 450, 45, 722
n.W.2d 505, 506 (2006).
4 State ex rel. NSBA v. Gallner, 263 neb. 35, 638 n.W.2d 89 (2002).
5 see State ex rel. NSBA v. Van, 25 neb. 96, 556 n.W.2d 39 (996).
6 see Finney, supra note 2.
7 § 3-32.
4 	277 neBrasKa rePorts

acts both underlying the offense and throughout the disciplin-
ary proceeding.8
Boose was convicted of a felony for failing to report his
client’s felonious activity. as an attorney, Boose has an obli-
gation to uphold the laws of the United states. his failure to
do so is a grievous breach of professional ethics. it violates
basic notions of honesty and endangers public confidence in
the legal profession.
[4] Boose has violated his oath of office as an attorney and
§ 3-508.4(b). the motion for reciprocal discipline is granted.
Boose is disbarred from the practice of law in the state of
nebraska, effective immediately. he shall comply with neb.
ct. r. § 3-36, and upon failure to do so, he shall be sub-
ject to punishment for contempt of this court. furthermore,
Boose is directed to pay costs and expenses under neb. rev.
stat. §§ 7-4 and 7-5 (reissue 2007) and neb. ct. r.
§§ 3-30(P) and 3-323 within 60 days after an order imposing
costs and expenses, if any, is entered by this court.
JuDgmeNt of DiSbarmeNt.
8 see Finney, supra note 2.
state ex reL. coUnseL for dis. v. Boose 	5
cite as 277 neb.