
    In the Matter of Zvi Hershel SMITH.
    No. 2009-43 M.P.
    Supreme Court of Rhode Island.
    Jan. 22, 2013.
    Zvi Hershel Smith, pro se.
    David Curtin, Esq., Disciplinary Counsel.
   ORDER

This matter came before the Court at its conference on January 10, 2013, pursuant to a petition for reinstatement to the practice of law submitted in accordance with Article III, Rule 16 of the Supreme Court Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. The petitioner, Zvi Hershel Smith, was suspended from the practice of law by order of this Court on an interim basis on May 25,1995. On May 15, 1998, after his conviction on two counts of felony embezzlement, he was disbarred.

On a petition for reinstatement, it is the burden of the petitioner pursuant to Rule 16(c) to demonstrate to this Court by clear and convincing evidence that he has “the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to practice law in this State and that his or her resumption of the practice of law within the State will be neither detrimental to the integrity and standing of the Bar of the administration of justice nor subversive of the public interest.” Having reviewed the petition, the report filed by Disciplinary Counsel in accordance with Article III, Rule 5(b)(4) of the Supreme Court Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, and after hearing the representations of the petitioner and Disciplinary Counsel, we conclude that the petitioner has not met his burden.

Accordingly, the petition for reinstatement is hereby denied.  