CFA Practice Question

There are 356 practice questions for this topic.

CFA Practice Question

Rick is a security analyst at Sunshine Advisers Group. Yesterday he was charged with possession of a controlled substance (marijuana), a misdemeanor under the state law. This is the third time in a year that he has faced minor drug-related charges. However, it is believed by Rick's boss that this conduct does not affect his work. Has Rick violated Standard I (D)?
Correct Answer: Yes

Rick's conduct reflects adversely on his fitness as a CFA charterholder. Convictions of even minor offenses might rise to the level of violating Standard I (D).

User Contributed Comments 21

User Comment
kalps Frequency is key and it is a misdemeanor
Slothrop Yes is correct, however, it should be noted that the official CFA materials say, "Generally, Standard I(D) is not meant to cover legal transgressions resulting from acts of civil disobedience in support of personal beliefs because such conduct does not reflect poorly on the member or candidate's professional reputation, integrity, or competence."
surob Keep in mind though that this is not a misconduct due to his personal beliefs, it is something that potentially might influence his performance and reputation
buzai2000 i guess the key word would be controlled substance and the nos of times:)
Masterkang Oh no! Does is mean I can't take Marijuana any more?
epizi I guess no realistic boss with testify in support of a worker who take marijuana, I does have a long run effect though
bobert Your boss may not think that taking coke creates impairment either. That is also illegal though. Frequency is definitely a major part, but also the degree of the offense. Just because you murdered only one person will not exempt you from breaking Standard 1(D). (Or the law for that matter)
robB Maybe it was his medicine !!
sanyukta controlled substance - is the keyword...

for robB, never assume anyth

if u r arrested becuz u were against irag war, now..that wud not be a violation, it is a personal belief and is not a violation of 1D but if u streaked naked and wear a board, bobby smith, CFA, well i dunno lol
rhardin I think typing incoherrently reflects badly on the investment profession...
jpducros to be "in possession of" is different from "being a consumer".
kahh i agree fully with roBb, THC, the active ingredient in marijuana has been scientifically proven to lower and even eliminate stress and depression far better than some synthetic drug made by a pharma with some questionable objectives,Billion dollar C-level perks and private corporate jets
Bill12345 It says he is doesn't say anything about conviction. Being charged doesn't necessarily mean he was guilty.
michlam14 Yeah smoking weed is not really pursuing one's personal believes (in the text book it is about a woman who is arrested in some sort of demonstration) unless their goal were to "experience god" ;) He's repeatedly breaking the law so it reflects badly on him & the profession? I am sure there are lots of IBankers out there doing lines all day but we're just talking about the standards here.
NikolaZ If his boss believes that it does not affect his work, and his boss is widely believed as being competent, then would this act not be a violation of the standard?
NikolaZ But I guess that it hurts his professional reputation, so it is a violation of the standard.
DavidMo31 I think some people are missing the point; this is not a violation because of anyone's personal beliefs about the use of controlled substances or even his bosses opinion on how it affects his work. This is a violation specifically because the incidents mentioned and the frequency reflect poorly on the analysts reputation and thus compromise the reputation of financial professionals as a whole. It is my understanding that a lot of the Standards are designed to promote confidence in the industry; regardless of the specific events the frequency of potentially compromising incidents alone can have a dramatic impact on how financial professionals are viewed.
schweitzdm Any substance that creates intoxication is going to affect someone's ability to perform investment decisions. One or two drinks that do not create definitive drunken effects for someone don't create that scenario, while any amount of recreational drug should be assumed to do just that if they are not prescribed.
gerdvar Guys, what about a Rasta CFA?
Rudger Does he not also Violate standard I A knowledge of the law?
carlo_ita Rik misheavou
You need to log in first to add your comment.