What is the range of discipline recommended by the California Bar Review Department for an attorney who misappropriated funds from his clients while he had no disciplinary record?

Therefore, in light of the amount of funds misappropriated and petitioner's deliberate refusal to account to his clients, the discipline recommended by the review department is not excessive. A sanction of one year's actual [40 Cal.3d 585] suspension and probation with conditions is not inconsistent with this court's holdings in similar cases of commingling and misappropriation by an attorney with no disciplinary record. (See e.g., Brody v. State Bar, supra, 11 Cal.3d 347, 350, 113 Cal.Rptr. 371, 521 P.2d 107 [one-year actual suspension]; Bradpiece v. State Bar, supra, 10 Cal.3d 742, 748, 111 Cal.Rptr. 905, 518 P.2d 337 [one-year actual suspension, four years probation]; Persion v. State Bar (1973) 9 Cal.3d 456, 462, 107 Cal.Rptr. 708, 509 P.2d 524 [one-year actual suspension, two years probation].)