Richard L. Cherry

INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940
Release No. 2273 / August 9, 2004

Admin. Proc. File No. 3-11581

I.

The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 ("Advisers Act") against Richard L. Cherry ("Respondent").

II.

In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement (the "Offer") which the Commission has determined to accept. Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except as to the Commission's jurisdiction over him and the subject matter of these proceedings, Respondent consents to the entry of this Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions Pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as set forth below.

III.

On the basis of this Order and Respondent's Offer, the Commission finds that

Respondent

A. Respondent was employed by the Utah Retirement Systems from 1980 through January 2003, serving as its chief investment officer from 1992 through January 2003. Respondent, age 53, is a resident of Bountiful, Utah.

Other Relevant Entities

B. Utah Retirement Systems ("URS") is the state agency responsible for administering retirement and defined contribution benefits of state and local government employees of the State of Utah. URS manages approximately $11 billion in assets.

Background

C. On February 17, 2004, the Director of the Division of Securities, Department of Commerce of the State of Utah ("Division of Securities"), issued a Stipulation and Consent Order ("State Order") against Cherry, In the Matter of Richard L. Cherry, Docket No. SD-03-0089. In the State Order, the Division of Securities found that an investigation by its staff concluded that Cherry had violated the Utah Uniform Securities Act by acting as an unlicensed investment adviser representative and by engaging in insider trading for his own account and the account of a private advisory client. Cherry agreed to the State Order without admitting or denying the Division of Securities' findings.

D. The findings in the State Order were based on Cherry's conduct while he was the chief investment officer of the URS. The State Order found that Cherry had, among other things, violated the Code of Ethics of the URS by engaging in securities transactions that were in conflict with his position as the chief investment officer of the URS. The State Order also found that Cherry had purchased securities in advance of funding Cherry knew the URS would provide to its investment advisers for investment in certain URS portfolios. Cherry engaged in the transactions knowing that the investment advisers who had received funds from the URS would purchase the same securities Cherry had previously purchased.

E. Based on these findings, the following sanctions were imposed on Cherry: (1) he was barred from associating with any licensed investment adviser; (2) he was barred from supervising any licensed investment adviser representative or broker-dealer agent; (3) he was required to re-qualify by examination prior to acting in the capacity of a broker-dealer agent; (4) he agreed to a restricted license and heightened supervision if he attempts to re-license as a broker-dealer agent in the future; and (5) he was ordered to pay a fine of $17,000, however, payment of $7,000 of that amount was waived based upon Cherry's financial condition.

IV.

In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate and in the public interest to impose the sanctions specified in Respondent Cherry's Offer.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

A. Pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Advisers Act that Respondent Cherry be, and hereby is, barred from association with any investment adviser.

B. Any reapplication for association by the Respondent will be subject to the applicable laws and regulations governing the reentry process, and reentry may be conditioned upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the satisfaction of any or all of the following: (a) any disgorgement ordered against the Respondent, whether or not the Commission has fully or partially waived payment of such disgorgement; (b) any arbitration award related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order; (c) any self-regulatory organization arbitration award to a customer, whether or not related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order; and (d) any restitution order by a self-regulatory organization, whether or not related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order.

By the Commission.