You could very well be right. But she could have asserted those factors in mitigation before the final suspension order was decided.
Looks like there were 4 cases before the State Bar, One for unpaid fees resulted in only a reprimand, another for basically client neglect resulted in a fully probated suspension (don’t know for how long), another for client neglect resulted in a six month active suspension remainder probated, final case resulted in 3 year active suspension (no probation) looks to have involved client neglect and mishandling of funds. Was substantial restitution involved in the cases. Looks to me like the State Bar did take some mitigating factors into account. For others here I am no fan of the Texas State Bar.