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

Newman, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.127 Ohio St.3d 123, 2010-Ohio-5034. Decided 10/21/2010.Case Summaries- 230Respondent plead guilty to three counts of felony theft and failed to report the felonies to the Ohioattorney disciplinary authorities. This case was originally remanded by the court back to the board forlack of sworn or certified evidence necessary to support the findings of fact and conclusions of law andrecommended sanction of an indefinite suspension. See Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Newman, 124 OhioSt.3d 505, 2010-Ohio-928. On remand, relator amended its motion for default and submitted certifiedcopies of the indictment, bill of particulars, plea agreement, and judgment entry of sentencing, and theinvestigator‘s affidavit. Respondent was indicted on 7 counts of passing bad checks in violation ofR.C. 2913.11(B) and 3 counts of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(3). In the bill of particulars it wasalleged that he deposited checks drawn on closed accounts or accounts with insufficient funds and thenwithdraw cash. This caused losses of $5,809.67 to Fifth Third Bank, $11,804 to U.S. Bank, and$4,459.99 to Huntington. He pleaded guilty to the three counts of theft, felonies of the 5th degree inSeptember 2007, was sentenced to three years community control and restitution in the amount of$4,454.59 to Huntington Bank and $5,804.57 to Fifth Third Bank. He did not notify the disciplinaryauthority in Ohio of his conviction. When the board brought it to the court‘s attention, it imposed ainterim felony suspension on February 2, 2009 and referred it to relator for investigation. Respondentdid not respondent to the disciplinary investigation inquiries, did not file an answer to the complaint, anddid not submit an affidavit confirming compliance with the interim suspension order. The board adoptedthe master commissioner‘s findings of violations of Prof.Cond.R. 8.1(b), 8.3(a), and 8.4(b). Inaggravation, he failed to cooperate with the disciplinary process. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(e). Inmitigation, he had no prior disciplinary history in over 45 years of practice. The board adopted themaster commissioners recommended sanction of an indefinite suspension. The court quoted Blankemeyer(2006): ―An attorney who has been convicted of felony theft offenses has violated the basic professionalduty to act with honesty and integrity.‖ The court also quoted Stein (1972), stating among other things:―The integrity of the profession can be maintained only if the conduct of the individual attorney is abovereproach.‖ The court adopted the board‘s findings, conclusions, and recommended sanction and soordered an indefinite suspension with a condition of reinstatement that he pay $4,454.59 in restitution toHuntington Bank and $5,804.57 in restitution to Fifth Third Bank.Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 8.1(b), 8.3(a), 8.4(b)Aggravation: (e)Mitigation: (a)Prior Discipline: NO Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NOPublic Official: NO Sanction: Indefinite Suspension