No. 21-1440

Mark T. McCloskey v. Missouri Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel

Lower Court: Missouri
Docketed: 2022-05-13
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 2nd-amendment due-process fourteenth-amendment moral-turpitude pardon professional-misconduct right-to-bear-arms second-amendment self-defense
Key Terms:
SecondAmendment DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-06-02
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Second Amendment and Due Process Clause permit attorney sanctions for professional misconduct based on a finding of 'moral turpitude' where the attorneys exercised lawful rights to bear arms and were pardoned

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Second Amendment and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution permit an attorney to be sanctioned for professional misconduct based upon a finding of “moral turpitude,” where the attorneys were exercising lawful rights to bear arms in defense of their person, family, and home, and the _ resulting misdemeanor conviction for each attorney was subsequently commended by the President of the United States and pardoned by the state’s governor.

Docket Entries

2022-06-06
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022.
2022-05-16
Waiver of right of respondent Missouri Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel to respond filed.
2022-05-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 13, 2022)

Attorneys

Mark McCloskey, et ux.
Michael Patrick DowneyDowney Law Group LLC, Petitioner
Michael Patrick DowneyDowney Law Group LLC, Petitioner
Missouri Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel
Edward D. Robertson Jr.Bartimus, Frickleton, et al., Respondent
Edward D. Robertson Jr.Bartimus, Frickleton, et al., Respondent