Disciplinary revocation is \u201ctantamount to disbarment,\u201d says the state Supreme Court\u2019s general language on the approval of such applications.<\/p>\n
Under disciplinary revocation, the lawyer is disbarred for five years, sometimes with the possibility of being readmitted. In return, the Bar discipline cases against him go away. This has no effect on any criminal or civil cases arising from the attorney\u2019s actions.<\/p>\n
READ MORE: A Florida attorney stalked his wife. That\u2019s not what could send him to prison<\/a><\/p>\n Details of the case<\/p>\n According to the report by case referee Judge James Yancey, Larry Powers III\u2019s mother had been arrested so he and Larry Powers Jr. went to see her at the Orange County Booking and Release Center on Jan. 13, 2025.<\/p>\n They \u201cindicated they were representing the mother in a legal capacity,\u201d the referee\u2019s report said.<\/p>\n But Powers Jr.\u2019s disciplinary revocation application had been approved on Jan. 2, 2025, so only one of those Larry Powers was still able to say he was there as her attorney. Powers III showed his driver\u2019s license and Florida Bar card. Powers Jr. showed only his driver\u2019s license. The son was allowed into the client-lawyer area and the father wasn\u2019t.<\/p>\n \u201cShortly thereafter, Powers Jr. again asked for assistance in locating the client-lawyer meeting area at a different location at the facility,\u201d the referee\u2019s report said. \u201cThe sheriff\u2019s deputy on duty asked Powers Jr. to produce identification.\u201d<\/p>\n This time, Powers Jr. pulled out a Bar card and driver\u2019s license. But the deputy found the names didn\u2019t match \u2014 the Bar card was that of Powers III.<\/p>\n \u201cThereafter, both [Powers III] and Powers Jr. were removed from the premises,\u201d the referee\u2019s report said.<\/p>\n Powers III didn\u2019t respond to the Florida Bar throughout the discipline process.<\/p>\n Yancey recommended that Powers III be disbarred and found guilty of misconduct and minor misconduct; violating the rules of professional conduct; misconduct by dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; misconduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and misconduct by failure to respond in writing to the grievance.<\/p>\n