LAWYER

REGULATION

SANCTIONED ATTORNEYS

JEFFRY STANTON BECKER

Bar No. 006063; File No. 12-2037

PDJ No. 2013-9066

After reviewing an agreement for discipline by consent, the presiding disciplinary judge entered a judgment and order dated Aug. 19, 2013, in which Jeffry Stanton Becker, Phoenix, was suspended for two years, retroactive to Nov. 1, 2012. Mr. Becker was ordered to pay $2,799 in restitution to a legal-services provider within 90 days of the order. Upon reinstatement, Mr. Becker will be placed on probation for two years with terms and conditions to be determined upon reinstatement. The terms shall include participation in the State Bar’s Member Assistance Program and Law Office Management Assistance Program. Mr. Becker also was assessed $1,217.40 for costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceeding.

Mr. Becker performed legal work not authorized by his clients, or in excess of that authorized by his clients, charged unreasonable fees to the legal-services provider based on that legal work and filed claims for payment in excess of amounts he was due.

Aggravating factors: Pattern of misconduct; multiple offenses; substantial experience in the practice of law.

Mitigating factors: Absence of prior disciplinary record; personal and emotional problems; cooperative attitude toward proceedings; character or reputation; remorse.

Mr. Becker violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT., specifically ERs 1. 2, 1. 5 and 8. 4(c).

JAMES A. LANDON

Bar No. 017315; File No. 13-0348

PDJ No. 2013-9080

After reviewing an agreement for discipline by consent, the presiding disciplinary judge entered a judgment and order dated Sept. 16, 2013, in which James A. Landon, Tucson, was reprimanded. Mr. Landon also was placed on probation for one year, during which time he must participate in the State Bar’s Law Office Management Assistance Program and Trust Account Ethics Enhancement Program. Mr. Landon also was assessed the costs and expenses of the State Bar in the disciplinary proceeding in the amount of $1,200.

Mr. Landon failed to maintain his client trust account in accordance with the relevant Supreme Court rules, including failing to maintain an accurate balance of funds, failing to maintain an administrative-funds ledger, failing to account for numerous stale checks, and failing to conduct required monthly three-way reconciliations. These errors dated back many years as he used a manual accounting system that in turn had been used by the firm before he bought the firm. Mr. Landon routinely had negative balances reflected on indi-