PHOENIX — State Rep. David Stringer’s legal problems multiplied Wednesday as the State Bar of Arizona launched an investigation to determine if he lied on his application to practice law here.
Bar spokesman Rick DeBruhl confirmed there is an inquiry into what Stringer, a Prescott Republican, did or did not disclose when he moved to Arizona and applied to be admitted to the bar here. That permission was granted by the state Supreme Court in early 2004.
DeBruhl said he could not comment further. But he said investigations like this normally are resolved within 30 days.
Records from Maryland show that Stringer, living in Baltimore at the time, was arrested in 1983 on multiple charges including child pornography. Those records, obtained by Phoenix New Times, also show that he entered into a plea agreement that required him to seek treatment from a doctor known for his sex-offender program.
The agreement was that the criminal record would be expunged if Stringer completed probation.
Aaron Nash, spokesman for the Arizona Supreme Court, said the application form submitted to the Committee on Character and Fitness requires disclosure of all arrests, regardless of whether there was a conviction. The forms also ask for all criminal records, even if the conviction was expunged.
Nash said he could not disclose Stringer’s forms as the applications are not public records.
Stringer did not return a message seeking comment on the bar investigation. He said last week that he has no criminal record.
The new inquiry comes as Stringer faces two complaints filed with the House Ethics Committee over statements about race and immigration he made last year, as well as the newly discovered criminal record.
Rep. T.J. Shope, who chairs the Ethics Committee, has sent copies of the two complaints against Stringer to him as well as to the panel’s other four members for review.
The complaints are from Rep. Kelly Townsend, R-Mesa, and Rep. Reginald Bolding, D-Laveen. Both say Stringer’s controversial comments last year, and the criminal charges if true, show conduct that undermines the confidence of the public in the House.
Stringer is entitled to file a written response. Public hearings could follow. The committee then would make a recommendation; final action would be up to the full House.
The inquiry by the State Bar is independent of whatever happens to Stringer in the House.
