Doctors Name: Maurice Jay Wolin
License Number: 63494
License Status:  Felony Conviction
Revoked


This Doctor is a
Registered Sex Offender

City of Record: Piedmont
Region: Northern
License issued on: 07/25/1988
Licensing Boards: Medical
Specialties : Internal Medicine

Gender: Male

Accusations and Infractions or Causes for Discipline:  Registered Sex Offender

Date of Last MBC Action: 

Repeat Offender:  No
Ongoing Discipline:  No
Out of State Discipline:  No
No Medical Board Activity:  

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Medical Board Documents, News Articles, Court Documents, Etc.

Article: To catch a predator—Lights, camera, entrapment 8/08/2007
Article: Three years later, doctor takes plea deal in TV sex sting 12/17/2009
Article: Piedmont doctor caught in TV sex sting sentenced 3/11/2010
Article: Doctor caught in TV molest sting gets jail 3/12/2010
Article: The Chat-log of Maurice Wolin 4/30/2010
+Decision and Order 8/19/2010
Article: Watsonville man acquitted of charges resulting from Petaluma sex sting on Dateline's 'To Catch a Predator' 8/16/2011
Sex Offender Registry 4/13/2018  

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Additional Information (Medical School, Dated Actions, Excerpts from Disciplinary Actions, Notes)
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Excerpt from Accusation dated 526//2010:

FIRST CAUSES FOR DISCIPLINE

Events

8. On or about 8/24/06, respondent entered a regional internet chat room using the screen name talldreamy_doc (Marco) and initiated communication (chatting) with an individual using the screen name willowfilipino (Willow). The chatting continued on 8/25/06, and 8/26/06.

9. Early on in their chatting, "Willow" identified herself as a 13-year old girl living in the 707 area code. Respondent replied "oh goodness" ... "you seemed so much older", but continued the chatting. Respondent indicated that he was 29 years old and from SF. (At the time, respondent was 48 years old and lived in Piedmont).

10. "Willow" was, in fact, Xavier Von Erck, an adult male, (hereinafter referred to as "Willow") and a volunteer for a non-profit child protection organization called "Perverted-Justice.com." The staff of this website are trained volunteer adult citizen-contributors who enter regional chatrooms as underage kids and, if solicited for sex by adults, work with police to prosecute and convict those adults. The volunteers, otherwise known as contributors, enter regional internet chat rooms posing as children ranging in age from ten to thirteen. Perverted-Justice.com has worked closely with law enforcement agencies throughout the United States in order to further the goal of prosecuting those adults who sexually solicit and molest young children. Their contributors are carefully screened, selected and then trained in a specific manner; this leads to their role of establishing themselves as an underage child on the internet via the creation of a profile. The contributors are trained not to initiate any conversation on the internet, but to allow the suspect to make the first contact.

11. Perverted-Justice.com has established a verification process once a suspect has been profiled from their internet conversations. The process incorporates a second person after the contributor obtains a telephone number for the suspect. The second person, who typically sounds like a juvenile, will contact the suspect by telephone and verify that the suspect is the same person who participated in the internet conversation with the contributor. Furthermore, all of the Internet conversations between the suspect and the perceived juvenile are maintained in archived logs. Those logs are provided to law enforcement as evidence for each investigation.

12. After Willow identified herself as a 13 year old girl, respondent asked "do you want my picture," after which he e-mailed Willow his picture. Respondent then inquired of Willow, "is your pie on your profile," to which Willow provided respondent with links to her "myspace" and "yahoo" profiles. Respondent then viewed Willow's pictures and responded "willow, you look great ... i like your smile." (Willow's picture on her profiles was in fact, that of a teenage girl placed there by Xavier Von Erck).

13. Thereafter, over the next couple of days, respondent engaged Willow in sexually explicit or seductive chat which included, but was not limited to, advising Willow that respondent had a Mercedes 550 SL sports car and inviting her for a ride, asking where her parents were, asking whether she would date older men, telling her not to tell her mother about him, advising her that he was 30 years old from San Francisco, asking her if she had ever been in love, whether she liked to cuddle, advising her that he could "make out slowly for hours," advising that he would perform specific sexual acts on her, asking her if she would be alone if he met her at her house, telling her that she was under 18 and "we would have to be soooo careful" asking about the neighbors, asking how he would be sure her mother would be gone if he came to her house, asking if she liked specific certain sexual acts, asking her bra size, and advising that "i care about you" ... "can you imagine me licking you while you rub yourself?" ... "will you touch yourself tonight and think of me?" In addition, regarding her age, respondent advised Willow that "its just i can get into big trouble, willow'', that "it just doesn't seem right...im 29 youre 13", that "its against the law". Respondent then made arrangements to meet Willow at her house while her parents were out of town and that he would enter through an open garage.

14. On the afternoon of 08/26/06, respondent drove from Piedmont to the specific address on a residential street in the city limits of Petaluma specified by Willow (1853 Castle Dr., Petaluma, CA 94954). Respondent was observed by Petaluma Police Department as he arrived at the location in a black Subaru Forester. Respondent walked up to the residence and entered the residence through the open garage door where he was greeted by a teenage actress posing as "Willow." Thereafter, the following events or conversation took place:

Willow: Hey, you made it. Come on back. [Respondent enters backyard].

Respondent: Yeah, please. How are you?

Willow: Good, how are you? So, not bad of a drive?

Respondent: Naw, well, not too bad.

Willow: Oh, take a seat. I made some drinks. I made frozen lemonade. [Respondent takes a seat at backyard table].

Respondent: Thank you.

Willow: Pour me a drink. I'm actually gonna put on my suit so maybe we can get in the hot tub cause it's all warm.

Respondent: I can't-- (spills) oh, geez, I'll get a rag. [Respondent spills lemonade]. Willow: So where you coming from?

Respondent: San Francisco.

Willow: Oh, okay. Oh yeah, so there probably was a lot traffic, huh?

Respondent: Do you have a—you have a towel, or a—  [Respondent gets up and looks for a towel].

Willow: Yeah there's a towel on the chair. [Respondent then spots a Dateline NBC camera crew who was surreptitiously filming the events].

Respondent: Okay, I gotta take off. Willow: What?

Chris Hansen of Dateline NBC: Sir? Sir? Respondent: Yeah?

Hansen: I need to talk to you for a minute.

[Respondent leaves quickly through garage but is confronted and detained by Sheriffs Deputies].

15. Respondent was detained and taken to the Command Post located at the Petaluma Municipal Airport where he was questioned and arrested. Respondent's car was taken to the Command Post for a search incident to the arrest. Located in respondent's car was a Garmin. Navigational System which contained the address and directions for the target house from respondent's residence. Respondent was eventually charged by the Sonoma County District Attorneys Office with violations of California Penal Code Section 288(a)l664 (a) - (Attempted) Lewd or Lascivious Acts with a Child under 14-years-of-age.

Acts or Omissions

16. Respondent committed the following acts or omissions regarding his interactions with "Willow:"

A Respondent acted as a sexual predator in his driving to Petaluma in an attempt to meet with, seduce, and/or have sex with what he believed to be a 13-year old girl, while her parents were out of town; and/or

B. Respondent engaged in and continued to engage in sexually explicit, lewd and graphic, internet chat conversations with what he believed to be a 13-year old girl that were designed to arouse and seduce, even though the chat conversations indicate he was fully aware that he was doing something wrong and equally aware that he could get into trouble; and/or

C. Respondent conducted seductive or lewd telephone conversations with a person he believed to be a 13-year-old girl; and/or

D. Respondent engaged in deception and subterfuge regarding his age and motivation which was designed to arouse and seduce Willow; and/or

E. Respondent engaged in deception and subterfuge in questioning Willow about her parents and in coming to her house when he thought her parents were out of town; and/or

F. Respondent's behavior reflected poor judgment and poor impulse control inconsistent with the safe practice of medicine; and/or

H. Respondent, as both a physician and father, put his own predatory interests and drives ahead of his protective instincts; and/or

I. Respondent, as a physician, violated or attempted to violate ethical codes or laws imposed on physicians which are specifically designed to prevent child abuse (for example, Penal Code section 11166 (child abuse reporting requirement), Business and Professions Code section 2232 (revocation of license for registered sex offenders)).

Grounds For Discipline

17. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action for unprofessional conduct based upon the Events, Acts, Omissions set forth hereinabove, pursuant to Business and Professions Code sections: 2234 (general unprofessional conduct); and/or 2234(a) (violating or attempting to violate any provision of this chapter); and/or 2234(e) (acts involving dishonesty or corruption).

ADDITIONAL CAUSES FOR DISCIPLINE
(Conviction of a Crime Requiring Sex Offender Registration/Revocation of License)

18. Section 2232 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, that the Board shall promptly revoke the license of any person who has been required to register as a sex offender pursuant to the provisions of Section 290 of the Penal Code.

19. Section 2236 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, that a licensee who is convicted of any offense substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon is guilty of unprofessional conduct. The record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction occurred.

20. Sections 490 and 493 of the Code provide, in pertinent part, as follows:

490. "A board may suspend or revoke a license on the ground that the licensee has been convicted of a crime, if the crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the license was issued . . .. A conviction within the meaning of this section means a plea or verdict of guilty or a conviction following a plea of nolo contendere."

493. ".... the record of conviction of the crime shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction occurred . . . . "that the

21. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action for unprofessional conduct in violation of Business and Professions Code section 2236, and/or Business and Professions Code sections 490/493, in that respondent was convicted of a crime that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon. The factual circumstances are as follows:

A. On or about February 7, 2008, in the County of Sonoma, Superior Court of the State of California, Superior Court Case No. SCR 495892, the Sonoma County District Attorney filed a 1st Amended Information against Maurice J. Wolin, charging a felony in Count 1, wherein it was alleged that "on or about the 26th day of August, 2006, in the County of Sonoma, State of California, the said defendant, MAURICE JAY WOLIN, did violate Section 6641288(a) of the PENAL CODE, in that he did willfully, unlawfully, and lewdly attempt to commit a lewd and lascivious act upon and with the body and certain parts and members thereof of JANE DOE, a child under the age of fourteen years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, and gratifying the lust, passions, and sexual desires of the said defendant and the said child."

B. On or about December 17, 2009, in the County of Sonoma, Superior Court of the State of California, Superior Court Case No. SCR 495892, respondent was found guilty by the Court and convicted following a plea of No Contest, to Count 1, Section 6641288(a) of the Penal Code.

C. On or about March 10, 2010, the Court sentenced respondent to 3 years criminal probation with numerous terms and conditions, including a requirement that respondent register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290 of the Penal Code.

D. The facts and circumstances of said conviction are as set forth in the FIRST CAUSES FOR DISCIPLINE hereinabove.

E. Respondent's conviction of a crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a Physician and Surgeon.

22. Respondent's conviction further requires registration as a sex offender pursuant to Penal Code section 290. Therefore respondent's Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. G63494 is subject to the provisions of section 2232 of the Code and his license must be revoked.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

DISCLAIMER: Most of the information found on this website is hand-culled directly from the Medical Board of California's ("Board") website and from news articles and is only as good as that original information; it's just easier to find and read here. We have a VERY small team of advocates working on this project, and cannot keep everything up to date in real time. Always check the Medical Board website directly for more information or changes.

Infractions are pulled from the "Board's" disciplinary documents themselves and/or news articles. Sometimes the categories and the categories here don't match the Board's exactly, so make sure you look up the infractions in the actual Medical Board documents.

Note: Accusations mean that a doctor has not had a hearing or been found guilty of any charges, but are being investigated by the Medical Board and/or the California Attorney General's Office.

**The California Medical Association (CMA) is a union of sorts for doctors in California. They have a lot of political power and donate a lot of money to the state's legislators in return for their "support." They appear to have a lot of "sway" over the Medical Board's members. One would think that most doctors would be members of the CMA with the amount of power they wield, but in actuality, 2/3 of this state's doctors refuse to join the CMA...which means that the majority of doctors in the state, choose to NOT be members.

This website is for informational and educational purposes only and is here only to help consumers research their doctors and make their own decisions, and does not necessarily reflect the feelings or research of the owners or moderators of this website. Please contact the webmaster with any questions, or to report errors or ommissions at webmaster@4patientsafety.org