BALTIMORE — With the appellate review of Marilyn Mosby’s federal perjury convictions complete, disciplinary proceedings that could cost the former Baltimore state’s attorney her law license may resume.

Separate federal juries convicted Mosby of perjury and mortgage fraud. Mosby has since completed a yearlong home-detention sentence.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Mosby’s appeal of her two federal perjury convictions. Two days later, a federal judge dismissed the mortgage fraud count with prejudice, meaning she will not be retried on that charge. In 2025, a federal appeals court vacated the fraud count while upholding two separate perjury convictions.

After Mosby’s 2023 perjury conviction, the Maryland Attorney Grievance Commission’s bar counsel sought to suspend her law license. The Supreme Court of Maryland delayed disciplinary proceedings in 2024 pending the outcome of her appeals, which have now concluded.

Under Maryland’s attorney-discipline rules, if the convictions are not reversed or vacated, the hearing must be held within a reasonable time after the appellate mandate is issued. Now, the court will ultimately determine whether Mosby violated professional-conduct rules and what sanction, if any, she should face.

Until action is taken by the Maryland Attorney Grievance Commission and Maryland Supreme Court to disbar Mosby, she is technically still allowed to practice law.

Mosby’s attorney, Alan E. Schoenfeld, declined to comment to The Baltimore Sun about the disciplinary proceedings.

Precedents for disbarment?

Maryland’s handling of Mosby’s case could depend on how the state’s highest court has treated other attorneys found to have engaged in intentional dishonesty.

In March, the Maryland Supreme Court disbarred attorney Spencer Michael Hecht in Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hecht after finding that he engaged in repeated acts of intentional dishonesty and other professional misconduct.

The Hecht decision relied on a long-standing precedent, Attorney Grievance Commission v. Vanderlinde, under which disbarment is generally the appropriate sanction for certain intentional dishonesty, fraud, and similar misconduct, absent compelling extenuating circumstances.

The court considers the nature, circumstances and consequences of the misconduct in deciding whether that standard applies.

“The disciplinary process is separate from the criminal process; however, a criminal conviction can form the basis for attorney discipline,” said Craig Brodsky, an attorney at Goodell, Devries, Leech & Dann LLP.

Even with Mosby’s criminal convictions, the Supreme Court of Maryland must still determine what professional-conduct violations have been established and what sanction is warranted.

“Whenever there are complaints against an attorney, it’s up to [the Attorney Grievance Commission and the Office of Bar Counsel] to examine all the circumstances to see where things are at timewise, and then it goes through their own process, which I do have to say is quite exhaustive,” said Robert Rubinson, a law professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law.

He added that Mosby would have multiple opportunities to argue that she did not intentionally engage in dishonest conduct during the disciplinary process.

During Mosby’s perjury trial, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Delaney told jurors that Mosby lied about financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. Jurors convicted Mosby of two counts of perjury involving separate transactions in which she sought early withdrawals from her retirement savings, totaling $90,000, based on claims of pandemic-related financial hardship under the CARES Act.

Mosby has maintained that she did not intentionally violate the law.

“I wanted the people of Baltimore to hear it from me: I’ve done nothing wrong,” Mosby said in a 2022 news conference. “I did not defraud anyone to take money from my retirement savings. I did not lie on my mortgage application.”

_____

©2026 The Baltimore Sun. Visit at baltimoresun.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.