Activist lawyer caught up in accusations of sex and drugs with client is disbarred
Jason Flores-Williams, an attorney known for his activism on behalf of the homeless, has been disbarred for allegedly pressuring a client to sign a plea agreement and mishandling her money while also propositioning her for sex and cocaine. (Photo by Anthony Camera, CC-BY-SA-4.0, via Wikimedia Commons)
An attorney known for his activism on behalf of the homeless has been disbarred for allegedly pressuring a client to sign a plea agreement and mishandling her money while also propositioning her for sex and cocaine.
In a ruling last month, Colorado Supreme Court Presiding Disciplinary Judge Bryon M. Large pulled lawyer Jason Flores-Williams’ ability to practice law in the state as of Dec. 26.
Described in press accounts as a “gonzo lawyer,” Flores-Williams is known for filing a class action lawsuit on behalf of homeless people in Denver. He also filed a suit attempting to declare “personhood” for the Colorado River.
In 2023, while under the influence of steroids, alcohol and marijuana, Flores-Williams texted a client he was representing in a criminal case, according to the judge’s ruling. He told his client that he had just won a big case and wanted a “white girl who wants to party.”
The client later testified that she understood that text to mean that he wanted cocaine and sex. She also said she had been concerned that if she turned him down, he might not fight for her in her criminal case, according to the ruling.
Flores-Williams, also known as Jason D. Williams, was also disbarred for his conduct in a separate case in which he was also accused of mismanaging client funds.
Flores-Williams did not return an ABA Journal email request for comment. The office of the presiding disciplinary judge said there is no attorney of record for him in this matter.
In the court ruling, Large found that Flores-Williams failed to uphold obligations that he owed to his clients, transgressed his duty of client loyalty, and violated the duties that he owed to the public.
“Respondent engaged in a concurrent conflict of interest when his representation of the client was materially limited by his personal interest in engaging in sexual or drug-related activity with his client,” Large wrote in his ruling. “He thus knowingly prioritized his interest in personal gratification over his client’s interests
Flores-Williams was also ordered to repay the two former clients.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
