Suspension
/bd =  business days
/m = months 
/y = years

Note:  suspensions are in "all " capacities unless otherwise indicated

Fines

Addt'l Factors

MAT = failed to disclose material info on Form

XI = failed to respond or provide info

TXI = failed to timely respond or timely provide info

XOTR= failed to appear for testimony

FI = submitted false info

OTR = issue concerning truthfulness/ accuracy of OTR testimony

cases resulting in less than 5 year suspension/bar

On December 23, 1993, Day was charged with Possession of Controlled Substances (FL), a felony charge which was later dropped by the prosecution.  On May 28, 1994, he was charged  for misdemeanor theft and fraud (FL), which charges were also dropped by the prosecution Respondent admitted at his NASD hearing that incorrectly answered "NO" on October 11, 2000, when he filed his Form U-4 to Question 23A(1)(b) asked whether Day had ever been "charged with any felony," and  Question 23B(1)(b) asked whether he had ever been "charged with a misdemeanor specified in 23(B)(1)(a)." The specified misdemeanors included those "involving … any fraud, false statements or omissions … [or] wrongful taking of property." 

As to the felony charge, Respondent initially answered "YES" to Question 23A(1)(b), thereby disclosing the charge but the firm's compliance officer changed that answer to "NO" as a result of a conversation with Day . Respondent says that the officer told him he need not disclose the charges because they were not "securities related;" (the latter said that Day told him the charges involved a misdemeanor, not a felony).   Day's attempted disclosure was consistent with his previous answered of "YES" to the National Futures Association's "felony charge" question and furnished details in seeking registration with that self- regulatory organization. He also disclosed the entire matter to the Chicago Board of Trade in his membership application.  The Panel deemed Respondent's overall attitude toward disclosure of the felony charge, coupled with the fact that the compliance officer changed the "YES" to "NO," to constitute mitigating circumstances. The undisclosed misdemeanor charge was viewed by the panel as the result of careless reading – he saw the phrase "investment-related" and assumed that it governed the entire question . Although the Panel noted that misdemeanors involving "theft" and "fraud" certainly appear serious for purposes of potential registration in the securities industry; it did explain that the subject of the "theft" was a rubber identification stamp used by a bar (which Day said was stolen by his friend) and the "fraud" involved stamping the hands of two under-21 females to obtain their entry into the bar. The events occurred during Respondent's undergraduate days and these charges were dropped, resulting in no adjudication of any such misconduct. 

MAT; TXI 

Judith Ann Kreuger (AWC/C9A030011/June 2003)

John Franklin Pinnix,III
(AWC/C05030012/April 2003)

Steven Paul Zaicek
(AWC/C10030004/March 2003)

Daniel Verne Smythe (OS/C3A030002/May 2003)

Peter Uran
(AWC/C10030010/March 2003)

James Richard Buschle, Jr.
-and-
Richard Alan Mika
-and-
Michael John Monahan
(OS/C10990158/March 2003)

Jesse Ogilvy Forbes
(SFC/03-2 January 16, 2003)

On or about May 14, 2001, Forbes completed and signed an application for non-registered seasonal employment with the Firm. He falsely answered "No" to the following question: “Have you ever been convicted of a crime? This includes misdemeanors. If yes, or you are unsure, please explain below.”

In 1997, Forbes was convicted,  of the misdemeanor offense of driving while ability impaired (CO) and was sentenced to 20 days in jail, which was suspended, 24 hours of community service, and six- to twelve-months of probation. In 1998, Forbes entered into a twelve-month deferred prosecution agreement (CO) in connection with a felony charge of criminal mischief $400-$15,000. The agreement required Forbes to pay restitution, submit to an alcohol evaluation and treatment program, and provide a letter of apology. Forbes satisfied the conditions and the felony charges was ordered dismissed with prejudice in 1999.

On April 13, 2001, Forbes pled guilty to the felony charge of second degree burglary (CO) and was granted a four-year deferred sentence that was to commence on May 5, 2001. The conditions of the deferred sentence included ten days in jail, the payment of court costs and fees, and participation in a substance abuse evaluation and treatment program.  Also on April 13, 2001, Forbes pled guilty to and was convicted of the misdemeanors of obstructing a peace officer and second degree trespass. The Court sentenced him  to probation under the same conditions as the deferred sentence. On July 11, 2002, the  Court granted Forbes’ “Motion for Early ‘Successful’ Termination of Deferred Sentence of Judgment” and dismissed the felony charge of second degree burglary with prejudice.

Sections 3(a)(39) and 15(b)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provide that an individual is subject to a statutory disqualification if he or she is “convicted” within the past ten years of any felony and certain specified misdemeanors.

Forbes was subject to a statutory disqualification based upon his April 13, 2001, guilty plea and deferred sentence for the felony charge of second degree burglary.  Forbes’ statutory disqualification period for this offense ended on July 11, 2002, when Court ordered the termination of his deferred sentence and dismissed the felony charge with prejudice.  He also failed to disclose his criminal history on the employer's application.

Dwight Eugene Davis
(HPD03-12/February 20, 2003)

• a Form U-4 and answered Question 23A(1) “Have you ever: (a) been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere (“no contest”) in a domestic, foreign, or military court to any felony [or,] (b) been charged with any felony?” with a false "No."  and
• an “Application for Sales Employment” (the “Employment Application”), which asked if he had “ever been arrested or indicted for any felony or misdemeanor involving the purchase, sale or delivery of any security, or arising out of the conduct of the business of a broker dealer . . . involving any crime in which violence or threats of violence against any person, dishonesty, the wrongful taking of property, or any manner of fraud was a factor, or involving conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing?” He falsely answered "No."

Davis had previously been arrested in March 1996 and charged with misdemeanor Assault (TX); and on or about March 29, 1996, Davis entered a plea of Nolo Contendere to the Assault charge. The court granted Davis a deferred adjudication (terminated Jan. 21, 1998) and sentenced him to probation for a period of six months,  ordered to pay a $100 fine. 

In March 1999, Davis was arrested and charged with the felony of Possession of a Controlled Substance (TX) and on or about March 5, 1999, he pleaded guilty to the felony of Possession of a Controlled Substance. The court granted Davis a deferred adjudication and sentenced him to probation for a period of five years, ordered to complete 300 hours of community service, and fined $1,000. (the “1999 Felony Offense”).

I.  In criminal cases in which a finding of guilt is deferred pending the satisfactory completion of probation, a person is considered convicted for purposes of Section 3(a)(39) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) until the period of probation has been completed and the court orders that the finding of guilt be withdrawn.   Thus, Davis is considered convicted of a felony and is subject to a statutory disqualification under Section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act until the completion of the five year probationary term which expires in 2004.

II.  As a result of the 1999 Felony Offense, Davis was subject to a statutory disqualification when he applied for employment with the Firm in 2001. His failure to make said disclosure was a violation.

Additional factor:  XI

cases resulting in excess of 5 year suspension/bars

David Eugene (C07020097/June 2003)

Rakesh Bhakta (OS/C06020015/June 2003)

Cindee Jo Dewitt
(SFC/03-38 March 12, 2003)

DeWitt completed and submitted an employment application, in August  2001 (the “Application”) in which she falsely answered "No" to the questions of “Have you ever been convicted of, or pleaded guilty or no contest to, any felony or misdemeanor other than minor traffic offenses?” and “Have you ever been arrested for, or charged with, any felony?”

12. According to court records, in 1994, DeWitt was charged with a felony of theft over $300 (IL). In 1995, she was convicted, based upon her plea of guilty, to an amended felony charge of theft under$300. She was sentenced to one-year probation and a fine of $560.  Subsequently, in 1995,  while still on probation for her first conviction, DeWitt was again charged with theft under $300 and  again convicted, based upon her plea of guilty. She was sentenced to 18 months probation.

Sections 3(a)(39)(F) and 15(b)(4)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provide,among other things, that an individual is subject to a statutory disqualification (“SD”)for a period of ten years based upon any felony conviction. DeWitt is subject to an SD until December 2005.

NAME REDACTED BY RRBDLAW.COM
(HPD03-24 March 4, 2003)

In 2000, XXX  falsely answered "No" to a question on her employer's Employment Application, which asked: “Have you ever been convicted of or plead guilty or not contest to any felony or misdemeanor involving securities, commodities, banking, insurance or real estate, fraud, falsestatements or omissions, wrongful taking of property, bribery, forgery, counterfeiting,or extortion in any judicial forum including a military court?”

In 1993, she had been convicted and sentenced in for the felony of Larceny (CT). In 1997 she had been convicted and sentenced  for the misdemeanor and felony Larceny; the felony of Forgery; and the misdemeanors of Illegal Use of a Credit Card and Issuing a Bad Check (CT); and separately convicted and sentenced  for the offenses of misdemeanor and felony Larceny (CT).  These felony and misdemeanor convictions subject Tolentino to a statutory disqualification under Section 3(a)(39)(F) and Section 15(b)(4)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The most recent conviction imposes the SD status for 10 years until April 2007.

As a result of the foregoing convictions, XXX was subject to a statutory disqualification when she applied for employment with the Firm in November 2000.   Additionally, XXX  failed to disclose on the Employment Application prior criminal convictions that made her subject to a statutory disqualification.

Lynn Marie Diaz
(SFC/03-42/March 18, 2003)

Under Section 3(a)(39)(F) and Section 15(b)(4)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, a person is subject to a statutory disqualification if, within ten years of the date of the filing of an application, such person has been convicted of any felony or certain specified misdemeanors, including any misdemeanor involving the theft of funds.

Alan Howard Davidson (OS/C11020043/May 2003)

Carmine Fusco (AWC/C9B030017/May 2003)

Nancy Murry (AWC/C04030015/May 2003)

Henry D'Onofrio
(C11020037/May 2003)

Joseph Michael Wilkins
(C07020088/April 2003)

Stephen Joseph Stoop, Jr.
(AWC/C9B030006/April 2003)

William Alexander Lawson
(C07020079/April 2003)

Sean Courtney
(C10020100/April 2003)

Jose A. Arteta
(AWC/C02030007/April 2003)

Paul Francis Clarke 
(C10020064/March 2003)

David Eugene Emmitt
(C05020033/March 2003)

Theresa A. Muir
(AWC/C11030003/March 2003)

Anthony Taylor
(C11020039/March 2003)