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

Cite as In re Summer, 19 DB Rptr 57 (2005)
predominant effect of the accused’s conduct was clearly felt in Oregon. (2) The Bar
proved by clear and convincing evidence that the Accused violated (DR) 1-102(A)(2)
when he committed the criminal act of attempted theft by deception under Idaho’s
criminal code, and because attempted theft reflects adversely on a lawyer’s honesty,
trustworthiness, and fitness to practice law. (3) The Bar proved by clear and
convincing evidence that the Accused violated both DR 1-102(A)(3) and DR
7-102(A)(5) when he made knowing misrepresentations and false statements of fact
to the self-insured company involved in his client’s second automobile accident.
(4) For commission of a criminal act within the practice of law that involves theft,
deceit, and dishonesty, the appropriate sanction is suspension from the practice of law
for 180 days.
58