Willmar attorney suspended by the Minnesota Supreme Court for possession of pornographic materials depicting minors

On Wednesday, March 15, 2023, the State of Minnesota Supreme Court suspended attorney Fred W. Inman for misconduct that involved the latter’s possession of erotic materials involving underage individuals. The case is entitled “In the Matter of Fred W. Inman”, and was brought by the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

On March 6, 2023, the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action against the respondent after the latter pled guilty to possession of materials depicting minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, a class B felony crime and punishable by a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.

The filing states:

“On September 28, 2021, the Clallam County prosecutor filed a criminal information charging the respondent with Count I: Possessing Depictions of Minors Engaged in Sexually Explicit Conduct in the First Degree (RCW 9.68A.070(1)) and Count II: Possessing Depictions of Minors Engaged in Sexually Explicit Conduct in the Second Degree (RCW 9.68A.070(2). On June 2, 2022, Count I of the information was dismissed, and the respondent entered a guilty plea to Count II: Possessing Depictions of Minors Engaged in Sexually Explicit Conduct in the Second Degree (Ex. 1).”

On March 13, 2023, a stipulation for discipline was signed by the respondent and the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility agreeing to the immediate disposition of the matter by the Minnesota Supreme Court. It’s also written in the said agreement that the respondent unconditionally admits the allegations of the petition and waives his rights which includes his right to a hearing before a referee.

The filing continues:

“The Director and respondent join in recommending that the appropriate discipline is a five (5) year suspension pursuant to Rule 15, RLPR. The suspension shall be effective on the date of the Court’s suspension order. The reinstatement hearing provided for in Rule 18, RLPR, is not waived. Reinstatement is conditioned upon: (0) payment of $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24(d), RLPR; (2) compliance with Rule 26, RLPR; 3) successful completion of the professional responsibility examination pursuant to Rule 18(e); and (4) satisíaction of the continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR.”

In the order entered by the Supreme Court of Minnesota, it was stated that the respondent admitted that his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct through the stipulation of discipline wherein the respondent and the petitioner agreed that the latter should be suspended for five years. In consideration of these factual findings, the court decided to agree with the stipulation.

The Disposition states:

“IT S HEREBY ORDERED that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for five (5) years pursuant to Rule 15, RLPR. The suspension shall be effective on the date of the Court’s suspension order. The reinstatement hearing provided for in Rule 18, RLPR, is not waived. Reinstatement is conditioned upon: (1) payment of $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24(d), RLPR; (2) compliance with Rule 26, RLPR; (3) successful completion of the professional responsibility examination pursuant to Rule 18(e); and (4) satisfaction of the continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR.”

Mr. Inman practices in Willmar, Minnesota. He is licensed in Minnesota with license no. 0303689. Mr. Inman’s info can be found on legaldictionaries.com.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.