In the Matter of Andrew Thurston Murphy

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to modification resulting from motions for reconsideration under Supreme Court
Rule 27, the Court’s reconsideration, and editorial revisions by the Reporter of Decisions. The version of the
opinion published in the Advance Sheets for the Georgia Reports, designated as the “Final Copy,” will replace any
prior version on the Court’s website and docket. A bound volume of the Georgia Reports will contain the final and
official text of the opinion.

In the
Supreme Court of Georgia
No. S26Y0623

In the Matter of Andrew Thurston Murphy

Decided: June 16, 2026

PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report
and recommendation of Special Master LaRae Dixon Moore pur-
suant to Bar Rule 4-106 (governing the disciplinary process fol-
lowing an attorney’s conviction for a felony or misdemeanor in-
volving moral turpitude). In her report, the Special Master rec-
ommends that the Court disbar Andrew Thurston Murphy (State
Bar No. 516099), who has been a member of the State Bar since
2013, for his violation of Rule 8.4(a)(2) of the Georgia Rules of
Professional Conduct (“GRPC”), found in Bar Rule 4-102(d). 1 The
maximum penalty for a violation of this Rule is disbarment. Nei-
ther Murphy nor the Bar has sought review by the Review Board
or filed exceptions to the Special Master’s report, and the record
before us supports the Special Master’s findings of fact and con-
clusions of law. Therefore, we agree that disbarment is appropri-
ate under the facts of this case.
The record shows that on December 6, 2024, Murphy pled
guilty to 13 felony counts of Terroristic Threats pursuant to
OCGA § 16-11-37(b) and four felony counts of Intimidation of a

1 Murphy is currently suspended for failing to adequately respond to a
notice of investigation issued in a related but separate matter. See In the Mat-
ter of Murphy, S24Y0065 (Aug. 24, 2023).
Court Officer pursuant to OCGA § 16-10-97 in the Superior Court
of Cobb County. Murphy was sentenced to serve a total of 15
years, with the first seven in confinement. The record underlying
the criminal matter showed that Murphy served as trial counsel
for a defendant charged with aggravated assault and possession
of a firearm during the commission of a crime. During his repre-
sentation of the client, Murphy sent a barrage of harassing emails
containing opprobrious language and terroristic threats to the su-
perior court judge overseeing his client’s case, the then-elected
District Attorney of the Cobb County Judicial Circuit, the then-
Chief Assistant District Attorney, the Assistant District Attorney
assigned to his client’s case, and other court personnel. On Feb-
ruary 11, 2025, the State Bar petitioned this Court to appoint a
Special Master to conduct a show cause hearing. See Bar Rule 4-
106(a). 2 This Court appointed the Special Master, who held the
show cause hearing on November 21, 2025. At the hearing, the
State Bar introduced certified copies of the disposition, indict-
ment, and waiver of rights form for Murphy’s non-negotiated
guilty plea and argued that Murphy should be disbarred. Murphy
did not attend the hearing.
Following the show cause hearing, the Special Master is-
sued her report and recommendation, in which she recounted the
crimes for which Murphy was convicted and concluded that he
violated Rule 8.4(a)(2). 3 The Special Master then noted that the
presumptive penalty for Murphy’s misconduct under the ABA

2 Rule 4-106(a) provides that “[u]pon receipt of information or evidence
that a conviction for any felony … has been entered against a lawyer, … [t]he
Office of the General Counsel shall petition the Supreme Court of Georgia for
the appointment of a Special Master to conduct a show cause hearing.”
3 Rule 8.4(a)(2) provides that “[i]t shall be a violation of the [GRPC] for
a lawyer to … be convicted of a felony”).

2
Standards was disbarment. See ABA Standards 5.11(a) (disbar-
ment is generally appropriate when “a lawyer engages in serious
criminal conduct, a necessary element of which includes inten-
tional interference with the administration of justice”); 6.31(c)
(disbarment is generally appropriate when a lawyer “improperly
communicates with someone in the legal system other than a wit-
ness, judge, or juror with the intent to influence or affect the out-
come of the proceeding”). Next, the Special Master determined
that there were five applicable aggravating factors: dishonest or
selfish motive, a pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses, sub-
stantial experience in the practice of law, and illegal conduct. See
ABA Standard 9.22(b), (c), (d), (i), (k). In mitigation, the Special
Master noted that Murphy had no prior disciplinary record, see
ABA Standard 9.32(a), but explained that the “aggravating fac-
tors outweigh the single mitigating factor.” The Special Master
then concluded that “the only appropriate discipline in this mat-
ter is disbarment.”
Upon our review of the record, we agree with the Special
Master that Murphy violated Rule 8.4(a)(2) and that disbarment
is appropriate, as it is consistent with the discipline imposed in
similar cases where an attorney violates Rule 8.4(a)(2) by com-
mitting a felony that involves the interference with justice. 4 See,
e.g., In the Matter of Barnes, 320 Ga. 589 (2024) (disbarring attor-
ney who violated Rule 8.4(a)(2) by being convicted of felony ob-
struction of a law enforcement officer among other crimes); In the
Matter of Hutto, 292 Ga. 556 (2013) (disbarring attorney who vio-
lated Rule 8.4(a)(2) by being convicted of one felony count of with-
holding information on a crime); In the Matter of Skandalakis,

4 We note that in imposing this sanction, we have not relied on “multi-
ple offenses” in aggravation of discipline under ABA Standard 9.22(d), given
that Murphy has not been charged with violating multiple Rules in this matter.

3
279 Ga. 865 (2005) (disbarring attorney who violated Rule
8.4(a)(2) by being convicted of one felony count of making a false
statement where attorney lied to an agent of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation).
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the name of Andrew
Thurston Murphy be removed from the rolls of persons authorized
to practice law in the State of Georgia. 5 Murphy is reminded of
his duties under Bar Rule 4-219(b).
Disbarred. All the Justices concur.

5 The related pending matter, In the Matter of Murphy (S25Y1477),
will be placed on the Court’s inactive docket and held, in the event that Murphy
elects to apply for reinstatement to the practice of law in the State of Georgia.

4