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

Cantrell, Disciplinary Counsel v.
130 Ohio St.3d 46, 2011-Ohio-4554. Decided 9/14/2011.
Case Summaries- 43
Respondent was convicted of grand theft and possession of cocaine. In Count One, respondent was
charged with tampering with records, grand theft, and falsification related to her illegally obtaining
Section 8 housing. Respondent pleaded guilty to two counts of grand theft and was sentenced to 120
days in jail, three years of Community Control, complete NEOCAP, attend Alcoholics Anonymous,
and complete 200 hours of community service. In Count Two, respondent was charged with possession
of cocaine, trafficking in cocaine and complicity to traffic cocaine. Respondent pleaded guilty to
possession of cocaine and was sentenced to the same sanctions as in Count One. Respondent has
admitted that her conduct violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b) (illegal act of dishonestly or untrustworthiness)
and 8.4(h) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law). The Court adopted these findings.
In mitigation, respondent fully cooperated and received other penalties and sanctions. BCGD Proc.Reg.
10(B)(2)(d), (f). Respondent tried to submit mental health mitigation to the Board, but did not submit it
to the panel, which is when such evidence is appropriate. Citing Sterner (1996), since there were no
special circumstances, the Court agreed with the Board to reject the evidence. In aggravation, respondent
had a prior disciplinary record, exhibited a dishonest or selfish motive, engaged in multiple criminal
offenses, and failed to appear the board hearing. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(a), (b), (d), (e). The Court
noted that respondent‘s interim felony suspension does not constitute prior discipline under BCGD
Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(a), but respondent‘s prior indefinite suspension does. The board recommended
permanent disbarment. However, because it improperly weighted respondent‘s prior discipline, the
Court rejected the sanction. Citing LoDico (2008), and Saunders (2010), the Court imposed an
indefinite suspension to run consecutively to respondent‘s current indefinite suspension.
Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b), 8.4(h)
Aggravation: (a), (b), (d), (e)
Mitigation: (a)
Prior Discipline: NO Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: YES
Public Official: NO Sanction: Indefinite Suspension