barnett-35319c.pdf (2012)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference. The original PDF remains the official record for legal purposes.
Need help? Please use the Assistance Request Form below.
Original PDF Document
Download Official Record (barnett-35319c.pdf)
Alternative Accessible HTML
Accessible Alternative: This HTML version is an automatically processed accessible alternative. While it provides a searchable format, the text extraction may contain formatting or character errors. The original PDF remains the authoritative official record.
Need a different format? Use the Request Assistance Form.
IN D1361? LBâlARY DISTRICT Ii.
OF THE
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
QF-ilili-E
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
IN RE: Stanley R. Barnett, BPR NO. 17870 FILE NO. 3531992âBCT
Respondent, an attorney linens ed
to practice law in Tennessee
(Bloom County)
PUBLIC CENSURLE
The above complaint was ï¬lezl against Stanley R. Barnett, an attorney licensed to practice
law in Tennessee, alleging certain note of misconduct. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 9., the
Board of Professional Responsibility oonsideracl tltese matters at its meeting on September 21,
2012.
After representing the criminal defendant at trial an appointed oonnsnl, the Respondent
failed to ï¬le at Motion for New Trial. Failing to ï¬le a Motion foâr New Trial resulted in the
waiver of all issues exoopt the snfï¬oienoy of the evidence and sentencing. Adtlitionelly, tho
Respondent failed to 903111313! with Crtnnml Prooï¬dure Rule 3â? (d) and (a), and Suprerne Court
Rule 13, § l(e)(5), Wilton require apnointed ootmsel to advise the client and the court of the
decision to waive an appeal, and to continue representing the defendant until obtaining
permission to withdraw. The client. ï¬led apro so Notice of Appeal. After being contacted by the
Court of Criminal Appeals, the Resnondent ï¬led an appellate brief which raised issues that had
been waived, and "which did not mine the issue of the snt'ï¬olonoy of the evidence. R8813011dtâ511t
did not consult with the client prior to filing the appellate brief.
By the aforementioned acts, Stanley R. Barnett has violated Rules of Professional
Conduct 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligeme), 1.4 (communication), and 1.16 (tenninating
lepresentaâcion), and is hereby Publicly Censmed for #11633 violations. Respondent has prior
publir; discipline of a similar nature.
FOR THE BOARD OF
PROFESSIONAL RESP CNSIBILITY
aim. NQMW
LelaHbllabaugh, Chair \J
Dawn/Mo I2) mic; W,
Date