2016 Ohio 3307
Ohio2016Background
- John David Tynes, formerly military, was convicted by court-martial in 1998 of multiple felonies for attempting to persuade girls he believed were under 15 to engage in sex and for possessing child pornography; he served 19 months of a 30-month sentence.
- The Cincinnati Bar Association admissions committee recommended disapproval of his Ohio bar application; Tynes appealed to the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness.
- A board panel found his crimes demonstrated disregard for law and the welfare of minors and unanimously recommended disapproval and a permanent bar to reapplication; the board adopted the report.
- Tynes disclosed his convictions to law schools, was admitted to Salmon P. Chase College of Law, engaged in treatment beginning in 2013 under OLAP, and underwent a forensic psychological evaluation finding no mental-health barrier to practicing law.
- The Supreme Court of Ohio found Tynes failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he currently possesses the character, fitness, and moral qualifications required for admission, but concluded his rehabilitation prospects were sufficient to permit reapplication in the future.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Tynes) | Defendant's Argument (Board/CBA) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tynes presently possesses requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications to be admitted to the Ohio bar | Tynes: convictions are remote (17+ years), punished, & post-release conduct and treatment show rehabilitation | Board/CBA: multiple felony sex offenses against minors show disregard for law and vulnerable persons; admission would undermine public confidence | Denied — Tynes failed to meet clear-and-convincing burden now |
| Whether Tynes should be permanently barred from reapplying for admission | Tynes: rehabilitation and precedent favor future opportunity; permanent bar is excessive | Board/CBA: seriousness of crimes justifies denying future applications to protect public trust | Court refused permanent bar; permitted reapplication beginning with July 2018 bar |
| Whether evidence of post-conviction treatment and evaluations outweigh past offenses | Tynes: OLAP participation, therapy, and psychologist clearance show low recidivism risk | Board/CBA: delayed engagement in treatment and earlier minimizations undermine credibility | Court credited remediation but found it insufficient now; may support future application |
| Whether applicant’s candor and honesty during the process affect fitness determination | Tynes: argues full disclosure to schools and compliance post-release show candor | Board/CBA: attempted minimizations and late disclosure of details raise honesty concerns | Court found concerns about honesty and integrity material to disapproval now |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Application of Daubenmire, 137 Ohio St.3d 435, 999 N.E.2d 669 (2013) (disapproved applicant with pandering conviction but allowed reapplication upon termination of registration obligations)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Grossman, 143 Ohio St.3d 302, 37 N.E.3d 155 (2015) (indefinite suspension appropriate for attorney convicted of receiving child pornography; recognizes potential for rehabilitation)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Goldblatt, 118 Ohio St.3d 310, 888 N.E.2d 1091 (2008) (indefinite suspension following felony convictions for attempting sexual conduct with an underage victim)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Pansiera, 77 Ohio St.3d 436, 674 N.E.2d 1373 (1997) (indefinite suspension for attorney who engaged in sexual conduct with a minor)