P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

Cite as In re Gibbons, 19 DB Rptr 265 (2005)
11.
The Accused admits that by causing the locksmith to cut the police lock and
by causing others to enter the Peano home, the Accused committed acts of criminal
trespass and obstructing governmental administration in violation of ORS
164.255(1)(a) and ORS 162.235, each a Class A misdemeanor.
Violations
12.
The Accused admits that, by engaging in the conduct described in this
stipulation, he violated DR 1-102(A)(2) of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Sanction
13.
The Accused and the Bar agree that in fashioning an appropriate sanction in
this case, the Disciplinary Board should consider the ABA Standards for Imposing
Lawyer Sanctions (hereinafter “Standards”). The Standards require that the Accused’s
conduct be analyzed by considering the following factors: (1) the ethical duty
violated; (2) the lawyer’s mental state; (3) the actual or potential injury; and (4) the
existence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
A. Duty Violated. The Accused violated his duty to the public to maintain
his personal integrity when he acted unlawfully in entering and rekeying the Peano
home. Standards, § 5.1.
B. Mental State. The Accused acted knowingly. The Accused was
explicitly informed that he did not have permission or authority to change the locks
or to enter the Peano home.
C. Injury. The Accused’s unlawful conduct caused injury by obstructing
governmental administration so that police and Medical Examiner’s personnel were
required to return to the scene to resecure the Peano home and to investigate whether
any of Peano’s property had been removed. Additionally, although the Accused’s
actions may have increased the security of Peano’s home vis-a-vis others who might
have possessed preexisting keys to Peano’s front door, the Accused rendered Peano’s
home vulnerable to Horowitz and to the Accused himself.
D. Aggravating Factors. Aggravating factors include:
1. The Accused has substantial experience in the practice of law.
Standards, § 9.22(i).
E. Mitigating Factors. Mitigating factors include:
1. The Accused has no prior disciplinary history. Standards, § 9.32(a).
2. The Accused had no dishonest motive. Standards, § 9.32(b).
268