Can a lawyer create falsified judgment and sentence orders to help imprisoned sex offenders?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer asked whether it would be proper to provide falsified judgments and sentences for persons imprisoned for sex offenses. The committee was of the unanimous opinion that, however well-intentioned, creating such a fraudulent document would violate RPC 4.1, which prohibits making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.

The committee determined that it was beyond its scope to consider whether the conduct might also violate the criminal law, but noted that to the extent it did, that conduct would also violate RPC 8.4.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1993, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer create a falsified court judgment or sentence even for a sympathetic reason?

A: No. The committee unanimously concluded that creating such a fraudulent document, however well-intentioned, violates RPC 4.1's prohibition on false statements of material fact or law to a third person.

Q: Did the committee address whether the conduct was also a crime?

A: The committee said deciding whether the conduct violated criminal law was beyond its scope, but noted that to the extent it did, the conduct would also violate RPC 8.4.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 4.1 (corresponding to ABA Model Rule 4.1), which bars a lawyer from making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person, to the creation of a forged judgment and sentence. It treated the document itself as a false statement of material fact. The committee added that conduct also constituting a crime would implicate RPC 8.4 (corresponding to ABA Model Rule 8.4), which addresses misconduct including criminal acts that reflect on a lawyer's fitness.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others); Washington RPC 4.1
• ABA Model Rule 8.4 (misconduct); Washington RPC 8.4

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1495: Duty to Turn Over Evidence From a Client
• WA Ethics Op. 1496: Disclosing a Client's False Statements to a Tribunal

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=594

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 1514
Year Issued: 1993
RPC(s): RPC 4.1
Subject: Providing falsified judgment and sentence orders for incarcerated sex offenders

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning the propriety of providing falsified judgments and sentences for persons imprisoned for sex offenses. The Committee was of the unanimous opinion that, however well-intentioned, creating such a fraudulent document would violate RPC 4.1 which prohibits the making of a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. The Committee determined that it was beyond its scope to also consider whether criminal law violations might be committed by such conduct, but noted that to the extent it might, that would also violate RPC 8.4.