ILNews

2 Indianapolis attorneys charged with felonies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Indianapolis attorneys are facing criminal charges after the Marion County prosecutor filed charges in unrelated cases.

Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry issued a press release Friday, announcing the criminal charges against attorneys David F. Rees and Steven B. Geller.

According to the release, Rees has been charged with theft of funds held in an estate that he managed, a Class C felony, and with obstruction of justice, a Class D felony. He has agreed to enter a guilty plea to both charges with a sentence to be concurrent on the two counts. He faces a maximum sentence of eight years, $20,000 in fines and restitution of $270,549.

Rees, according to the probable cause affidavit, drafted the will and was executor of the estate for his client Benjamin Roberts. Eight years after the client’s death, about $400,000 was missing from the estate. Rees has acknowledged diverting $270,549 into his personal account.

The obstruction charge arises from Rees allegedly filing a fraudulent “final accounting” in the estate on Jan. 20, 2012, indicating the unaccounted for funds were still in the estate.  

In a separate case, Steven B. Geller has been charged with five counts of Class D felony evasion of tax for failing to file Indiana individual or business income tax returns for the tax years 2007 through 2011. He was arrested Thursday.

Rees, who was admitted to practice in 1965, resigned from the bar on Jan. 28, 2013. Geller, admitted in 1989, is listed as active in good standing on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys, but has one concluded disciplinary case and another pending.
 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • STEVEN B GELLAR
    FREE MY LAWYER ! HES THE BEST ! GELLAR YOU LL BE FINE AND GET YOUR SELF OUTTA THERE! YOUR MOUTH PIECE IS COLD! YOUR ONE OF THE BEST DONT LET THE BULLSHIT BRING YOU DOWN !!
  • Counsel to the Council
    Wasn't David Rees the general counsel to the Common Council of the City of Lawrence? Maybe someday all of the crooks will be out of the government up there. Or, maybe it and the other corrupt fiefdoms within the County will be consolidated in an efficient, transparent Indianapolis City/County government... Maybe...

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT