How has the Local Administrative Committee of California determined that there is insufficient evidence to sustain charges against an attorney?

It should be observed that the local administrative committee did not indicate that it questioned the credibility of the witnesses against petitioner or that it found the evidence against him unworthy of belief. Rather, it indicated that in its opinion the evidence was sufficient to sustain the charges against petitioner by a preponderance of the evidence. However, since evidence to sustain charges against an attorney in a disciplinary proceeding must be by clear and convincing proof to a reasonable certainty (Moore v. State Bar, 62 Cal.2d 74, 79(2), 41 Cal.Rptr. 161, 396 P.2d 577), and the committee concluded that this standard had not been met, it recommended that the proceeding be dismissed.