Wine, women and texts: bad behavior that got a Florida attorney suspended
An elected public defender’s alleged drinking and inappropriate behavior in his office with women he shouldn’t have hired — and whom he fired after his own misbehavior — got a Jacksonville attorney suspended by the state Supreme Court.
Matt Shirk’s year-long legal timeout begins Sept. 24.
The Florida Commission on Ethics investigation into Shirk’s actions ended with a Sept. 18, 2019 recommendation to Gov. Ron DeSantis that Shirk be publicly censured, reprimanded and face a civil penalty of $6,000. The Florida Bar filed its complaint in April 2021.
Shirk was the twice elected (2009, 2013) Public Defender of the Fourth Judicial Circuit. While in that position, a referee’s report on the Florida Bar discipline case said, he “hired or directed the hiring of three women contrary to the procedures, policies or qualifications, or outside the normal hiring practices.”
The 2013 investigation by the Florida Times-Union that started public agency investigation of Shirk said Shirk found one of the women on social media and two at a nightclub.
Hiring and firing, office drinking and talking
In his report, referee Kenneth James Janesk II writes that Shirk admitted to the Commission on Ethics and twice in sworn statements to the Florida Bar that “he engaged in workplace or work-related interactions with these women of a personal interest to himself by sending several personal flirtatious text messages that included “e-cards” that were inappropriate and suggestive in nature.”
The referee’s report said when Shirk said when his wife found out about the texts, he directed the women be fired “for the private benefit of himself and to save his marriage.”
A referee’s report footnote says one woman was fired with cause, but Shirk admitted he would’ve sacked her “for the sole reason of “saving his marriage” if she was not fired “for cause.””
In deciding upon the recommended punishment for Shirk, Janesk considered the firing an aggravating factor against Shirk: “dishonest or selfish motive in that firing the female employees was done because [Shirk] wanted to save his marriage.”
The report said Shirk admitted to keeping alcohol in an office decorative globe and providing alcohol to two of the women at the office while it was open, but while they were off work.
But, Shirk’s response to the Florida Bar complaint also says, “For many years the Public Defender’s Office had office parties and gatherings that included alcoholic beverages. It was not uncommon for alcohol to be consumed in the Public Defender’s Office.”
The juvenile client, C.F., was a 12-year-old indicted as an adult for first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse in 2011. The boy was assigned to the public defender’s office. Shirk filed a motion in December 2011 for a guardian ad litem to be assigned. The guardian ad litem filed a motion in February 2012 that reassigned the accused boy’s defense to the law firms of Holland & Knight; Bedell, Dittmar, DeVault, Pillans & Coxe; McGuire Woods; Creed & Gowdy; and the Law Office of D. Gray Thomas.
During an interview with a French documentary film crew, the referee’s report said, Shirk made confidential client communication public.
“[Shirk] testified that he believed it was in the best interest of C.F. and that he had consent from his earlier communications with C.F. as his Public Defender,” the referee wrote.
But, as a minor, C.F., couldn’t give consent and Shirk hadn’t gotten consent from the guardian ad litem or C.F.’s current defense team.
