SAN FRANCISCO – David M. Spieker, a Modesto attorney who was previously suspended
from practice before the Board of Immigration Appeals, the Immigration Courts,
and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for one year, has sought
reinstatement to practice with no objections from any of the departments.
“The Disciplinary Counsel for the Executive Office for
Immigration Review (EOIR) does not oppose the respondent's motion for
reinstatement,” the official June 7 Department of Justice (DOJ) document said, “[Spieker’s]
motion for reinstatement will be granted.”
The initial series of suspensions started with a May 14,
2013, order from the Supreme Court of California, who ordered that Spieker
be suspended from the practice of law in California for two years, but stayed the
execution of that suspension and placed him on probation for two years with
“One condition of [Spieker’s] probation was a one-year suspension
from the practice of law,” the document said. “On April 1, 2014, the
Disciplinary Counsel for EOIR petitioned for [Spieker’s] immediate suspension
from practice before the Board of Immigration Appeals and the Immigration Courts.”
Consequently, the Disciplinary Counsel for the DHS then
asked that Spieker be similarly suspended from practice as well. They granted
the petition for immediate suspension on April 23, 2014.
“[Spieker] did not file a timely answer to the Notice of
Intent to Discipline, and did not dispute the allegations in the Notice,” the DOJ
document said. “Given [his] suspension from the practice of law in California,
our May 27, 2014, final order of discipline suspended the respondent from
practice before the Board, the Immigration Courts, and the DHS for 1 year,
effective nunc pro tunc to June 13,
Spieker’s suspension and probationary conditions were ordered
when the Supreme Court found reasonable evidence that he formed a partnership
with a non-lawyer, lent his name to be used by non-lawyers, and shared fees
with a non-lawyer.
On June 7, after Spieker’s request to be reinstated to
practice before the board, the Immigration Courts and the DHS, presented
evidence that he was again authorized to practice law in California.
“[Spieker] now meets the definition of attorney as set forth
and has complied with the reinstatement requirements set forth,” the DOJ
document said. “Further, the Disciplinary Counsel for EOIR does not oppose his
reinstatement. We therefore grant the respondent's motion for reinstatement.”
Thus, Spieker is reinstated to practice before the board,
the Immigration Courts and the DHS as of June 7. The document also explained
that because he has been reinstated, public notices regarding his suspension
should reflect this reinstatement.
It was stipulated, though, that if Spieker wishes to
represent someone before the DHS, the Immigration Courts or the board, he must
file a notice, even in cases in which he was counsel prior to his suspension.