Matter of Miller
2025 NY Slip Op 03385 [241 AD3d 30]
June 5, 2025
Per Curiam
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, October 15, 2025


[*1]
In the Matter of Stefan Michael Miller, a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department, June 5, 2025


PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Joint motion pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.8 (a) (5) by the Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department and respondent for discipline on consent. Respondent was admitted to the bar on May 1, 2009, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department.


HEADNOTE


Attorney and Client - Disciplinary Proceedings - Suspension

Respondent attorney was suspended from the practice of law for a period of four months based upon his plea of guilty to criminal contempt in the second degree, a serious crime within the meaning of Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (d). Respondent violated an order of protection when he visited his former paramour, which resulted in an altercation between them. The four-month suspension—requested by consent of the parties—was warranted in view of respondent's admitted misconduct and the mitigating circumstances presented. Respondent had no prior disciplinary history; cooperated with both the New York County District Attorney's Office and the Attorney Grievance Committee during their respective investigations; accepted full responsibility and expressed remorse for his misconduct; successfully completed a 16-week abusive partner intervention program; voluntarily placed himself in an intensive rehabilitation program for alcohol dependency, post-traumatic stress disorder, and emotional counseling; attended and led Alcoholics Anonymous meetings; was well regarded in the legal community and had a reputation for honesty and integrity.


APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Jorge Dopico, Chief Attorney, Attorney Grievance Committee, New York City (Raymond Vallejo of counsel), for petitioner.

Richard E. Mischel for respondent.


{**241 AD3d at 31} OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Stefan Michael Miller was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on May 1, 2009, under the name Stefan Michael Miller. The First Judicial Department retains jurisdiction over respondent as the admitting Judicial Department pursuant to Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (NYCRR) § 1240.7 (a) (2). Respondent is also a member of the bars of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

On August 1, 2023, respondent pleaded guilty to criminal contempt in the second degree and was sentenced to a one-year conditional discharge. By order dated July 25, 2024, respondent was immediately suspended pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (f) and 22 NYCRR 1240.12 (b) (2), for committing a "serious crime" as defined by Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (d). Respondent was directed to show cause at a hearing as to why a final order of discipline should not be made based on his conviction of a serious crime.

Respondent and the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) now jointly move under 22 NYCRR 1240.8 (a) (5) for discipline by consent and seek an order suspending respondent for four months, nunc pro tunc to July 25, 2024, the date of respondent's interim suspension.

In support of the motion, the parties stipulate that on or about March 4, 2023, respondent violated an Order of Protection when he visited his former paramour, which resulted in an altercation between them. During the altercation, the paramour slipped and hit her forehead on a table, causing her to{**241 AD3d at 32} bruise. She did not seek medical attention for the injury. Respondent was arrested and later pleaded guilty to criminal contempt in the second degree on August 1, 2023. He was sentenced to a one-year conditional discharge, which was conditioned on his completion of a 16-week "Abusive Partner Intervention Program."

The parties further stipulate that respondent has no disciplinary history, including before the USPTO and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. He has cooperated with both the New York County District Attorney's Office and the AGC during their respective investigations. Respondent also continues to cooperate with the bars of the USPTO and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals whose investigations are pending the outcome of this matter. He has accepted full responsibility and expressed remorse for his misconduct. Moreover, since pleading [*2]guilty, respondent has successfully completed the 16-week "Abusive Partner Intervention Program"; voluntarily placed himself in an intensive rehabilitation program for alcohol dependency, post-traumatic stress disorder, and emotional counseling; and attends, and has led, Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. The parties also assert that respondent is well regarded in the legal community and has a reputation for honesty and integrity.

In light of respondent's admitted misconduct, the mitigating circumstances presented, and discipline imposed by this Court for similar attorney misconduct, the parties' request for a four-month suspension is appropriate (see e.g. Matter of Cherkasky, 183 AD3d 42 [1st Dept 2020] [two-month suspension of attorney who pleaded guilty to engaging in verbal and physical altercation with a woman while intoxicated]; Matter of Walker, 181 AD3d 62 [1st Dept 2020] [four-month suspension of attorney who admitted to physically assaulting his date and expressed remorse, cooperated with the AGC, had an unblemished disciplinary history and a reputation for good character]; see also Matter of Ruby, 232 AD3d 179 [1st Dept 2024]).

Accordingly, the parties' joint motion should be granted, and respondent is suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York for a period of four months, effective nunc pro tunc to July 25, 2024, and until further order of this Court.

Kern, J.P., Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt and Michael, JJ., concur.

Wherefore, it is ordered the parties' joint motion for discipline by consent, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.8 (a) (5), is{**241 AD3d at 33} granted, and respondent, Stefan Michael Miller, is suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York for a period of four months, effective nunc pro tunc to July 25, 2024, and until further order of this Court; and

It is further ordered that, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, respondent, Stefan Michael Miller, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) the practice of law in any form, either as principal or agent, clerk or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and

It is further ordered that, respondent, Stefan Michael Miller, shall comply with the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15), which are made part hereof; and

It is further ordered that if respondent, Stefan Michael Miller, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith.