The practice of law demands personal integrity and adherence to the law, a standard tragically violated by California attorney Henry Paul Noto. Noto received a severe 18-month actual suspension of his law license after being convicted of a felony DUI causing injury and admitting to subsequent ethical failures.
His case is particularly noteworthy as he navigated the discipline process through the State Bar’s Alternative Discipline Program (ADP), which addresses issues related to substance abuse and mental health. While his participation mitigated the ultimate penalty of disbarment, the Court still mandated a significant suspension to protect the public.
The Core Misconduct: Criminality and Moral Turpitude
The disciplinary action stemmed directly from criminal conduct that involved severe harm to others:
-
Felony Conviction: In May 2019, Noto was convicted of Vehicle Code section 23153(b), which involves driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or greater, resulting in bodily injury. He also admitted to allegations of inflicting great bodily injury and causing injury or death to multiple victims.
-
Moral Turpitude: The State Bar Court found that the circumstances surrounding this felony conviction involved moral turpitude, which is a severe finding that permanently damages an attorney’s professional standing and fitness to practice.
Suspension via the Alternative Discipline Program (ADP)
Noto’s disciplinary path was guided by the Alternative Discipline Program (ADP), which is available to attorneys whose misconduct is directly linked to treatable mental health or substance abuse issues.
-
ADP Participation: Noto successfully participated in the ADP, providing evidence that his misconduct was tied to mental health issues and chemical dependency (alcohol abuse). This successful participation was a major mitigating factor that likely prevented permanent disbarment.
-
The Sanction: The Supreme Court ordered a two-year suspension (with execution stayed) and three years of probation.
-
Actual Suspension: Despite the mitigation, the Court required Noto to serve an 18-month actual suspension during his probation period. This lengthy suspension serves as a punitive measure and protects the public while he continues his recovery.
Subsequent Ethical Failures
Even after his conviction, Noto committed additional ethical breaches, compounding his professional issues:
-
He failed to comply with the terms of a prior public reproval (issued in 2017).
-
He failed to provide a proper accounting of advance fees to clients.
-
He failed to return a client file promptly upon request.
The Court required Noto’s reinstatement to be strictly conditional on his full compliance with all probation terms, including continued participation in the State Bar Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP) and passing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE).
Conclusion: Accountability and Recovery
The suspension of Henry Paul Noto serves as a dual-sided message from the California State Bar:
-
Zero Tolerance for Criminality: A felony conviction involving moral turpitude, especially one causing severe injury to multiple victims, will result in immediate and lengthy removal from practice.
-
Support, Not Exemption: While the Bar acknowledges and supports recovery efforts through the ADP, participation does not exempt an attorney from serving a substantial period of suspension necessary to protect the public.
Noto’s 18-month suspension ensures that he is barred from the profession until he can fully demonstrate his fitness, recovery, and renewed commitment to the ethical standards shattered by his actions.