In the Matter of Gregory Bartko

In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: October 5, 2021
S21Z0853. IN THE MATTER OF GREGORY BARTKO.
PER CURIAM.
Gregory Bartko appeals the decision of the Board to Determine
Fitness of Bar Applicants (“Board”) denying his petition for a waiver
of its policies regarding character and fitness applications and
administratively withdrawing his application. For the reasons set
forth below, we affirm the Board’s decision.
The record shows that Bartko was first licensed to practice law
in Georgia in 1995. In 2014, Bartko voluntarily surrendered his
license to practice law, which is functionally equivalent to
disbarment, after he was found guilty of federal charges of
conspiracy, mail fraud, and selling of unregistered securities. He
was sentenced to 272 months’ imprisonment and ordered to pay
$885,946.89 in restitution. The conviction was affirmed on appeal.
See generally In the Matter of Bartko, 295 Ga. 862 (764 SE2d 553)
(2014).
In December 2020, while temporarily moved to home
confinement under the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), Bartko filed his application
for certification of fitness to practice law. In his application, Bartko
acknowledged that he has approximately ten years remaining of his
original prison sentence. The record also shows that he has paid
virtually none of the restitution.
Bartko later petitioned the Board to waive application of its
policy of not considering applications from currently incarcerated
individuals until after the applicant’s sentence is completed.
Though he is out of prison, Bartko is still serving his sentence of
incarceration at home under the CARES Act. The Board denied the
petition, explaining that Bartko had not shown sufficient cause to
warrant any waiver of the policies. The Board’s purpose is to
protect the public from unfit lawyers. See In the Matter of
Huddleston, 297 Ga. 726, 730 (777 SE2d 438) (2015). Permitting
2
someone to practice law while serving a prison sentence would
undermine the public’s trust in the legal profession. See In the
Matter of Stoner, 246 Ga. 581 (272 SE2d 313) (1980) (“[T]he
appearance of a convicted attorney continuing to practice does more
to disrupt public confidence in the legal profession than any other
disciplinary problem.”). Bartko is still serving a lengthy sentence
for serious offenses, including fraud, and he has made little progress
toward satisfying his obligation to pay restitution. Consequently,
we affirm the Board’s decision denying the waiver.
Denial of waiver affirmed. All the Justices concur.
3