ABRUPT RESIGNATION:

Questions raised about Byrd’s disbarment last year for misappropriating funds

Charles G. Byrd Jr., hired in February to lead reviews of discrimination and police abuse claims as deputy director of Baltimore’s Office of Civil Rights and Wage Enforcement, abruptly resigned Tuesday after The Baltimore Sun asked questions about his disbarment last year.

Charles G. Byrd Jr., who was hired in February to lead reviews of discrimination and police abuse claims as the deputy director of Baltimore’s Office of Civil Rights and Wage Enforcement, abruptly resigned Tuesday after The Baltimore Sun began asking questions about his disbarment last year.

Byrd “decided to resign because he didn’t want his past to be a distraction to the important work of the Office of Civil Rights,” said the office’s director, Jill P. Carter, on Tuesday. She declined to elaborate, and Byrd could not be reached for comment.

Byrd was disbarred in April 2017 for misappropriating funds in his private law firm’s attorney trust account “for his personal use and benefit,” according to court records.

Carter defended Byrd as recently as Monday, when she said she was “well aware” of his disbarment when she hired him but did not believe it prevented him from serving as her deputy.

“Being barred is not a requirement of the job,” she’d said, and Byrd “brings a whole lot of experience that we needed. He’s actually been a major asset and one of the most valuable additions since I’ve gotten here.” Carter said she believes “in second chances.”

Byrd also downplayed his disbarment in an interview on Monday, saying none of his former clients lost money in the matter. He said he consented to disbarment because he was the firm’s managing partner and was planning to retire anyway.

Benfred Alston, Byrd’s former partner, with whom he started the Alston & Byrd firm in 1991, could not be reached for comment.

Carter was named Monday to a seat in the Maryland Senate to finish the term of Nathaniel T. Oaks, who resigned, but she said she will remain director of the city’s civil rights office.

As deputy director, Byrd oversaw both the Civilian Review Board, which hears citizen complaints about Baltimore police officers, and the Community Relations Commission, which investigates claims of discrimination in employment, public accommodation, housing, education, and health and welfare services.

Byrd was nearing 30 years in the law profession upon his disbarment, having represented both plaintiffs and defendants in a broad array of discrimination lawsuits and other civil matters. He has represented victims of excessive force and false arrest by police, and defended Baltimore police officers against such claims.

Byrd also is a former vice president of the National Bar Association, the nation's largest network of predominantly AfricanAmerican attorneys and judges. Carter said he came highly recommended by many prominent figures in Baltimore — including many in the legal profession.

Both Carter and Byrd noted Monday that his disbarment did not involve criminal charges against him.

Since Byrd was disbarred “by consent,” his case was not litigated through the courts and a full description of what happened was not entered into the public record. However, a joint petition filed in the matter by Byrd and the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland outlined the basic allegations in the case.

The petition states that Byrd “acknowledged that he was primarily responsible for the management and reconciliation of his firm’s attorney trust account, and that he misappropriated funds belonging to his law firm for his personal use and benefit.”

Such accounts hold client funds that may be due to attorneys eventually but haven’t been earned yet, such as payments clients make to retain attorneys or settlements won in cases and awaiting distribution.

The petition states that, to the court’s understanding, at least $50,000 in firm funds were misappropriated, and that Byrd understood that “sufficient evidence could be produced to sustain allegations of professional misconduct” were the matter to move forward in court.