By Mia Bella Rodgers
LOS ANGELES — The State Bar of California has approved a disbarment stipulation for Los Angeles attorney Aaron Spolin, who admitted to charging incarcerated clients and their families excessive legal fees while misleading them about their chances of resentencing under Assembly Bill 2942.
Spolin, State Bar No. 310379, acknowledged he should be disbarred for “repeated collection of unconscionable legal fees” and deceptive practices that gave clients false hope for relief under AB 2942.
The stipulation places him on involuntary inactive enrollment starting June 20, barring him from practicing law until the California Supreme Court rules on his case.
If the court affirms the stipulation, Spolin will be officially disbarred and required to pay restitution.
According to the State Bar, Spolin was charged in two disciplinary cases filed in August and November 2024 by the Office of Chief Trial Counsel.
He allegedly charged clients to prepare and submit resentencing petitions under AB 2942 to the Los Angeles and Orange County district attorneys, knowing they were ineligible under both counties’ criteria.
Los Angeles County publicly posts that it does not prioritize violent offenders for review under AB 2942.
Orange County requires that such requests be submitted by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), not private attorneys.
Despite being told by both district attorney offices that such petitions would not be accepted, Spolin continued soliciting funds from clients.
The State Bar cited aggravating factors including multiple instances of misconduct, serious financial harm, and exploitation of vulnerable clients for personal gain.
Mitigating factors included letters attesting to Spolin’s character and his admission of wrongdoing.
“This was serious misconduct justifying disbarment,” said George Cardona, the State Bar’s chief trial counsel.
“Attorneys are sworn to act in their clients’ best interest. Mr. Spolin failed in that duty by misleading incarcerated people and their families, and charging them unconscionable fees for his own personal gain.”
Spolin’s case stands out as overcharging does not always lead to disbarment.
In 2011, a New Jersey attorney was suspended after billing an 88-year-old widow $120,000 in estate fees, despite expert testimony that $15,000 would have been appropriate.
In 2024, a California attorney accused of misappropriating $282 million from 60,000 clients was placed on involuntary inactive status, but disbarment is still pending.
Chicago attorney Jeffery M. Leving was suspended for five months in 2024 after overcharging $440,000 in eight domestic cases.
In contrast, Spolin’s disbarment has been approved based on detailed findings.
In one case, he charged $14,000 to the sister of a man serving a 160-year sentence for violent felonies — a category excluded from AB 2942 consideration.
In another, he charged $26,700 to a woman seeking resentencing for her brother, despite knowing the request would be rejected under Los Angeles County’s criteria.
In a third case, Spolin billed $21,700 to an incarcerated man and his fiancée for services including an AB 2942 petition and commutation request, despite his ineligibility.
He also collected $28,500 from the wife of another client for similar post-conviction services after receiving at least eight letters from the Orange County DA reiterating CDCR’s exclusive authority to file such requests.
Jeremy Cutcher, a former lawyer at Spolin’s firm, reportedly told the family of Wesner Charles, Jr., — serving 27 years for carjacking and robbery — that resentencing could free him within eight months.
Cutcher later left the firm.
Charles told the Los Angeles Times he was relieved to learn of the disbarment.
“Harming other people and taking advantage of family members — that’s not a good thing,” Charles said.
Spolin’s license is currently inactive pending Supreme Court review.
Under California Business and Professions Code sections 6100 and 6103, attorneys may be disbarred for violating their professional oath or duties.
The Office of Chief Trial Counsel prosecutes attorney misconduct, and the State Bar Court adjudicates these cases.
The court may recommend suspension or disbarment, but the California Supreme Court must affirm any disbarment ruling.
More information about attorney discipline is available at calbar.ca.gov.
