AUBURN – Seth Carey said Wednesday he’s competent to represent defendants in court despite complaints issued by lawyers and judges that cast doubt on his courtroom conduct.

Carey, a Rumford lawyer and former casino referendum official, testified on the second day of a hearing at the Androscoggin County Superior Court law library. The Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar is prosecuting four complaints against Carey, three of them forwarded by the Board’s Grievance Commission. A single Maine Supreme Judicial Court justice presided over the hearing.

Carey defended his actions against complaints that include allegations of unethical behavior and incompetence.

“I know I’m capable” of representing defendants at trial, he told the board’s prosecutor on cross-examination, while dabbing his eyes with a handkerchief. “I’m only improving all the time and I know I’m going to make an excellent trial attorney.”

He said he was comfortable applying the rules of evidence in a trial setting.

By contrast, a district court judge testified Tuesday that Carey appeared to be at a loss for words during a routine traffic violation trial in her courtroom when she told him he couldn’t ask leading questions.

Another time, she said, his representation of a defendant at a bail hearing fell far short of a typical defense counsel argument.

His only response to the prosecutor’s recommended bail was paraphrased as, “Gee, judge, that seems like a lot,” by Judge Valerie Stanfill.

She said she coached him along in an effort to glean more information about the defendant’s circumstances, including whether the man could afford the proposed bail amount.

Carey said Wednesday he made the most pointed response at the time, getting at what he believed was the heart of the matter. The informal nature of his wording was calculated to reflect Stanfill’s casual demeanor on the bench, aimed at making an impression on her, he said.

He didn’t make arguments about the defendant’s flight risk, danger he posed to the community, local ties or job status because, contrary to the judge’s assertions, Carey hadn’t been given time to confer with his client and prepare that information, he said.

“I was just grabbed out of nowhere with zero warning, with zero notice that I would be doing a bail hearing,” he said. “It was the first time I’d ever done anything like that.”

Although he’s represented many clients, Carey said he hadn’t been called on to argue a defendant’s bail before. He had a general sense of what was involved in such a proceeding, he said.

A second district court judge testified Wednesday, saying he filed a complaint against Carey after he learned during a divorce hearing in his courtroom that Carey had allegedly played a role in going behind the back of the opposing attorney to get property-division documents signed by the opposing attorney’s client.

Carey testified Wednesday that he met with the other party’s attorney the day after that attorney’s client complained about the first document and gave the opposing attorney a copy of the second document. That attorney, David Austin of Rumford, disputed that assertion when he testified on Tuesday, saying Carey never shared either document with him before it was presented to his client.

Carey’s courtroom conduct during the hearing also concerned Judge John McElwee, he said.

During Carey’s closing argument, he referred to the estranged spouse of his client as a liar. “I found it to be extremely harsh language,” McElwee said. Moreover, evidence presented at trial didn’t support the characterization, he said.

At another point during the hearing, Carey refused to show a document to the opposing attorney. McElwee called the lawyers into his chambers to resolve the issue, noting Carey’s breach of courtroom protocol.

There, Carey told the judge something McElwee said “I’ll never forget.” Carey told him: “How would you expect me to know that? You don’t give me enough court appointments.”

McElwee said he became concerned that Carey’s future clients might not get the representation to which they’re constitutionally entitled.

A court clerk at Oxford County Superior Court testified Wednesday that Carey handled misdemeanor cases transferred from district court. “He seemed very professional,” she said. When she asked him to pick up Class C felony cases, he told her he was uncomfortable doing that, she said.

Justice Andrew Mead said at the end of the two-day disciplinary hearing that the prosecutor and defense attorney should write their arguments explaining how much of the evidence and testimony presented over those two days should be considered by him. Defense attorney Stephen Chute objected at the start of the hearing to allowing evidence outside the scope of the four complaints.

The two sides are expected to present closing arguments in writing and orally at a future hearing.

In his ruling, Mead could:

• dismiss any or all of the complaints;

• dismiss with a warning;

• suspend Carey’s license to practice law;

• issue a suspension but allow him to continue practicing;

• issue a reprimand;

• disbar.

Carey would have a right to appeal Mead’s decision to the full Maine Supreme Judicial Court.