LAW WEEK COLORADO
Centennial attorney Mark Brennan has been suspended for a year and a day and must submit to an “independent medical examination” to continue practicing beyond that, a Colorado hearing board has ruled.
Brennan can appeal the decision made by the three-person panel, which included Presiding Disciplinary Judge William Lucero.
Brennan’s case was the subject of extensive coverage in Law Week Colorado. An initial story, “Be Nice or Be Disciplined,” discussed the controversy over whether sarcastic remarks made in a courtroom could rise to the level of sanction.
A subsequent three-day disciplinary hearing, which Brennan derisively termed a “witch trial,” drew national attention. On the first day, Lucero held Brennan in contempt for mocking a witness. By Day 3, a shove and a glower captured on video by Law Week ignited a debate about courtroom etiquette. Despite the incidents, no additional action was taken.
Besides criticizing the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, which pursued the initial charges, Brennan also complained about Law Week’s coverage.
According to a letter posted at www.knowyourcourts.com, Brennan wrote: “Law Week chose to webcast only two very brief portions which tended, particularly out of context, to portray me in a very bad light: (1) Judge Lucero’s peremptory and unjust citation of me for contempt for asking Judge Blackburn’s mousy court reporter, “Do you have any evidence of any kind that I was even aware of your mousy presence in the courtroom when I told my client during a break I thought the judge was doing everything he could to help the City win?”; (2) the “altercation” instigated by Kim Ikeler during my closing, in which Ikeler, in violation of several previous directives by Judge Lucero, approached me from behind while I was facing the judges with my left arm outstretched, and pressed against my hand only to be restrained by me from moving closer to me, after which I turned to confront him and suggest in no uncertain terms he get away from me.”
“To be sure, the foregoing “incidents” were much more sensational and exciting than some other parts of the trial, yet they were neither particularly relevant to the matters at issue, nor fair in their emphasis. Law Week seemed more intent upon portraying me in a bad light than in fair reporting on the proceedings. Like OARC, Law Week seemed to be intent upon confusing the issue.”
