Friday, October 24, 2025
Page 1
Defense Attorney, Immigration Lawyer Agree to Disbarment for Misappropriating Funds
By a MetNews Staff Writer
State Bar Court judges have recommended the disbarment of two attorneys for misappropriating client funds and committing other misconduct, the Office of Chief Counsel announced yesterday.
Claire White, a criminal defense attorney with an office in Solano County, well-known for fiery social media posts and courtroom successes, and Qiang Ma, a San Marino immigration lawyer, each agreed to the action pursuant to a stipulation with the disciplinary body. Both attorneys have been placed on inactive status until the California Supreme Court makes the final ruling on disbarment.
State Bar Court Judge Yvette D. Roland signed an Oct. 14 order recommending White’s disbarment to the California Supreme Court. White is the founder of the Solano County-based Dope Law Group, which she describes on her LinkedIn page as a firm “dedicated to prison abolition, Black liberation, and anti capitalism.”
White is described by the San Jose Mercury News as “popular” and “one of the Bay Area’s most famous defense attorneys.”
She is accused of misappropriating client funds on multiple occasions by depositing fees into her personal bank account and neglecting the cases. In one example, she was hired to represent inmate Robert Bruce in 2019 relating to a freeway shooting and high-speed chase.
Bruce’s father paid White $10,000, which she deposited into a personal account holding a balance of about $1,000. Over the course of the next two weeks, she spent thousands of dollars from that account on purchases at Target, Nordstrom Rack, Starbucks, and Ikea, draining the available funds down to $662.15.
Nine Absences
She appeared at three hearings on Bruce’s behalf but failed to show up for nine other scheduled appearances and did not follow through on her client’s many requests for a mental health evaluation.
In 2020, one of her clients, who was facing pending charges, informed her that he planned to go out of state for a funeral. She advised him that she would have cleared any warrant issued relating to his failure to appear at an upcoming hearing.
White failed to take steps to have the warrant cleared or to inform the court of the reason for his absence after he was remanded into custody on Feb. 12, 2020. He was held without bail and remained locked up until April 2022.
The attorney also made three appearances in court between Oct. 1 and Oct. 8, 2020, a seven-day period during which she was on inactive status due to a failure to comply with continuing legal education requirements.
After Alameda Superior Court Judge Michael Gaffey discovered her temporary ineligibility, he required that the preliminary hearing conducted during that time frame be repeated, causing her client to remain in custody for an additional 75 days.
Purported Medical Leave
She was also accused of telling Napa Superior Court staff, in July, that she was on medical leave and could not proceed to trial on a case scheduled for the following week. White made the call while on break from an in-person preliminary hearing in Solano County.
Yesterday’s order notes her lack of prior discipline and emotional difficulties due to anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder related to her former military service. However, Roland said disbarment was appropriate, remarking:
“Respondent committed 40 counts of misconduct including but not limited to, acts of moral turpitude (misappropriation and conversion), misrepresentations to clients and the court, unauthorized practice of law, comingling client and personal funds, failing to perform diligently, failing to deposit advanced fees into a client trust account, failing to return client files, failing to respond to client inquiries, and failing to provide an accounting to her clients upon reasonable request.”
Other Misappropriation
Also announced yesterday was a Sept. 11 order, signed by State Bar Court Judge Phong Wang, recommending the disbarment of Qiang Ma for misappropriating $760,000 from a client, as well as dishonesty and failing to provide an accounting.
In 2019, Ma was retained by a Chinese businessman to assist with U.S. immigration filings and a corporate restructuring necessary to facilitate an L-1A visa, which allows a foreign executive to work at a domestic entity if the applicant has worked abroad for at least one of the preceding three years.
His client, Chao Yan, paid Ma $75,000 in legal fees and provided the lawyer with $850,000 to use to purchase a controlling interest in a California company that would serve as the businessman’s sponsoring employer.
After the company’s chief executive officer instructed Ma to return $700,000 of the investment, he instead transferred the funds to a entity controlled by his son. An additional $60,000 reimbursement was diverted to Ma’s client trust account and never delivered to Yan.
Immigration Status
The September order provides:
“Mr. Yan…suffered significant harm. He paid respondent attorney fees of $75,000 to change his immigration status while he was still in lawful status, but while respondent was representing Mr. Yan, Mr. Yan lost his lawful status and ended up in ICE detention. From there Mr. Yan ended up in removal proceedings. Mr. Yan had to hire three other attorneys to resolve issues arising due to respondent’s representation of Mr. Yan.”
The other attorneys helped Yan recoup the stolen money, but the effort involved the filing of four lawsuits and litigation pending for almost four years.
Wang noted the lack of disciplinary history but pointed to statements Ma made to a State Bar investigator, mischaracterizing the nature of the deposited $60,000. Based on the misappropriation and dishonesty, the jurist wrote:
“[T]he presumed sanction of disbarment is appropriate because the amount misappropriated ($760,000) is not insignificantly small and compelling mitigating circumstances do not clearly predominate….
“As to the misrepresentation, it was an intentional effort to mislead the State Bar in its investigation of respondent’s conduct, and was directly related to the practice of law, in that it was in connection with an investigation of respondent’s conduct while practicing law. As a result, the misrepresentation also warrants disbarment.”
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company