04.09.2014 Views

disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Case Summaries- 26<br />

102(A)(4), (A)(5), (A)(6), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3) for filing the appeal but not the<br />

trial transcript, by failing to respond to the court‘s show- cause order which resulted in a dismissal <strong>of</strong> the<br />

appeal with prejudice; by failing to communicate with the defendant or another person on his behalf; by<br />

failing to return the file or the attorney fee; and by not responding to relator‘s inquiries. As to Count<br />

VIII, respondent was hired to pursue a criminal appeal <strong>of</strong> a defendant (Raypole) convicted <strong>of</strong> aggravated<br />

drug trafficking and was hired to represent a defendant (Welton) in the appeal <strong>of</strong> a rape conviction and<br />

ten- years-to life prison sentence. Board found violations <strong>of</strong> DR 1-102(A)(4), (A)(5), (A)(6), 6-<br />

101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3) for in the Raypole matter filing an appeal but failing to file<br />

a timely brief which resulted in the appeal being dismissed with prejudice; and in the Welton matter<br />

failing to file a brief after receiving an extension; failing to respond to the court‘s show-cause order, and<br />

again failing to file a brief after the court granted additional time to file which resulted in dismissal <strong>of</strong> the<br />

appeal with prejudice for failure to file a brief.; and for failing to respond to Welton‘s request for<br />

information and ignoring the family‘s attempts to recover the fee; and failing to respond to relator‘s<br />

inquires. Respondent expressed to relator an interest in participating in the <strong>disciplinary</strong> process, raised<br />

to relator that mental-health issues prevented him from responding to the previous letters and<br />

pleadings, and informed relator he was involved with OLAP. There was a pattern <strong>of</strong> misconduct<br />

resulting in harm to clients, a <strong>disciplinary</strong> record, as well as failure to cooperate. BCGD Proc.Reg.<br />

10(B)(1)(a). The court adopted all the Board‘s findings <strong>of</strong> misconduct and the recommended sanction <strong>of</strong><br />

indefinite suspension.<br />

Rules Violated: DR 1-102(A)(4), 1-102(A)(5), 1-102(A)(6), 1-102(A) & (B), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(1),<br />

7-101(A)(2), 7-101(A)(3), 9-102(B)(3), 9-102(B)(4)<br />

Aggravation: (a), (c), (e), (h)<br />

Mitigation: NONE<br />

Prior Discipline: YES Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NO<br />

Public Official: NO Sanction: Indefinite Suspension

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!