Pro hac vice<\/em> means a lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in a certain jurisdiction has been authorized to participate in a particular case in that jurisdiction.<\/p>\n According to Barcinas, after reviewing the evidence and arguments presented to him by both parties, he has determined that Kingman was not required to take the oath upon pro hac vice<\/em> admission, and that consequently he did not engage in the unauthorized practice of law.<\/p>\n \u201cThe pro hac vice<\/em> process is an extremely limited and particularized path of entry to practice within the Commonwealth judicial system, one which exists as an alternative to bar examination, and one which is ultimately controlled and regulated not by the Board of Law Examiners, as other paths would be, but by the Supreme Court itself. In approving attorney Kingman\u2019s pro hac vice<\/em> application, the Supreme Court has found him to be in standing with the pro hac vice<\/em> requirements, and it is not the place of this court to usurp its findings. Therefore, the court finds that attorney Kingman was not required to take the oath upon pro hac vice<\/em> admission, and that consequently not engaged in the unauthorized practice of law,\u201d said Barcinas.<\/p>\n Barcinas also touched on Torres\u2019 argument that Kingman, in taking his oath on July 13, instead of when he was authorized to practice law pro hac vice<\/em> in February, is evidence that he had been practicing law illegally.<\/p>\n In response, the judge said he does not find this to be a strong argument that the oath is mandatory.<\/p>\n \u201cAttorney Kingman took the oath because he began his employment with the Attorney General\u2019s Office as a Rule 75-2 Assistant Attorney General, which specifically requires the oath by statute. The court does not find that Kingman, having to take the oath as a Rule 75-2 attorney, is dispositive of a finding that the oath is mandatory for Rule 75-1 attorneys,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Barcinas also addressed the defense\u2019s concern about Kingman\u2019s failure to affix his bar ID number.<\/p>\n \u201cDefendant cites the NMI Supreme Court\u2019s General Order No. 2005-100, which states that \u2018all attorneys licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth Courts shall affix their Commonwealth Bar Association identification number\u2019 next to their signatures on all pleadings filed in the courts, and that attorneys admitted pro hac vice<\/em> shall affix their identification number issued by the Clerk of Court of the Commonwealth Supreme Court. Defendant cites this passage as evidence that attorney Kingman should have been issued an identification number upon admission, and that his lack of such identification indicates that he was not truly admitted to practice in the Commonwealth. The court again does not find this to be a strong argument for the necessity of the oath for Rule 75-1 attorneys. Further, Kingman\u2019s failure to attach this number to his filing, while it does not comply with the general order, is not necessarily indicative of his not being authorized to practice law in the Commonwealth,\u201d said Barcinas.<\/p>\n The OAG filed criminal charges against Torres on April 8, 2022, alleging 12 counts of misconduct in public office, one count of theft, and one count of contempt based on a failure to appear for a legislative subpoena on Dec. 10, 2021.<\/p>\n Ralph DLG Torres<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" After months of waiting for a decision, Superior Court judge pro tem Arthur Barcinas has…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-402258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-local-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/402258","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=402258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/402258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=402258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=402258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=402258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![](\"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/images\/imgupload\/d0d4d504ffebc91c64e6b0d8bf8be1b4.jpg\")
<\/p>\n