What Verdica's 796 score means for Daniel Shawn Pickels
A composite score of 796 out of 850 places Daniel Shawn Pickens in Verdica's "excellent" band (800–850). While his score sits just four points below that threshold, it lands firmly in the "strong" category (740–799), which reflects a legal provider with demonstrable compliance strength and low regulatory risk.
For someone evaluating Pickens, this score suggests a track record aligned with professional standards as measured by Connecticut's bar regulator. The score is built on state bar disciplinary records and practice history—the same datasets state bar associations use to license and monitor attorneys. A composite score this high typically indicates no material disciplinary sanctions, consistent bar membership in good standing, and a practice profile consistent with typical legal practice patterns in the jurisdiction.
Readers should interpret this score as a positive indicator of regulatory compliance. However, Verdica has indexed no independent customer reviews yet for Pickens, so this score reflects regulator-side data only. A business or individual considering engagement should use this compliance signal as a baseline of due diligence—but should still conduct independent reference checks, fee reviews, and case-fit assessments before retaining services.
How the sub-scores break down
Bar Standing: 790. This sub-score reflects Pickens's current licensing status and record with the Connecticut bar. A score of 790 in this dimension is strong, indicating active, compliant bar membership. Attorneys with lower bar standing scores typically face license suspensions, restrictions, or lapsed membership. This score confirms Pickens maintains good standing and meets Connecticut's continuing legal education and ethical requirements.
Disciplinary History: 850. This is Pickens's highest sub-score and reflects his disciplinary record as tracked by the Connecticut bar. A perfect or near-perfect score in this dimension indicates no public disciplinary sanctions, complaints upheld by bar counsel, or ethics violations on record. This is a significant positive signal, as it demonstrates no documented pattern of client harm, fee disputes, or professional misconduct that triggered formal bar action.
Practice Profile: 700. This sub-score is the lowest of the three and sits in the "acceptable" range. In the legal industry, practice profile scores typically measure consistency with documented practice patterns, years in practice, and alignment with licensure scope. A score of 700 suggests Pickens's practice history is sound but may reflect less extensive public record activity, newer practice establishment, or a narrower practice scope compared to higher-scoring peers. This is not a risk signal; rather, it reflects lower data density or a less prominent public profile.
What regulators in CT track for legal providers
Connecticut's bar regulator (the Connecticut Bar Examining Committee and the Connecticut Appellate Court) maintains disciplinary records that track attorney misconduct, fee disputes, unauthorized practice, and ethics violations. Verdica indexes these records to identify patterns like repeated complaints, sanctions, license suspensions, or disbarments.
The state bar also maintains practice history records—years of licensure, jurisdictions, disciplinary contacts, and bar membership status. These data points inform whether an attorney is active, in good standing, and meeting mandatory continuing legal education (CLE) requirements.
Infractions that lower scores include disbarment, suspension, reprimand, restitution orders, and substantiated complaints about competence, candor, or client trust account mismanagement. Conversely, clean disciplinary records and consistent bar membership support higher scores. Verdica does not measure case outcomes, client satisfaction, or billing practices—only regulator-tracked compliance signals.
Bottom line
Pickens's 796 score reflects strong regulatory compliance with no apparent disciplinary issues and active bar standing in Connecticut. A prospective client or business partner can reasonably treat this as a positive compliance signal, but should independently verify references, confirm practice areas match their needs, and review fee arrangements before engagement. The absence of indexed customer reviews means this assessment is regulator-side only.