In re Harrington, 293 P.3d 686

Disciplinary proceeding filed against Kansas attorney Megan Harrington, admitted 2004.
Disciplinary Administrator charged violations of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct; Harrington answered and proposed probation.
Hearing panel found Harrington violated KRPC 8.4(b) based on criminal conduct.
Criminal conduct: April 18, 2009 cocaine and alcohol impairment leading to multiple convictions.
Judicial sentences included jail time, fines, ignition interlock, and three years of probation; monitoring and treatment occurred, with subsequent lapses.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Harrington violate KRPC 8.4(b)?	Disciplinary Panel found violations.	Respondent admitted misconduct but contested factors.	Yes, clear and convincing evidence supports violation.
What discipline is appropriate?	Panel recommended three-month suspension; administrator seeks harsher punishment.	Probation should be considered given mitigating factors.	Suspension for two years with partial stay conditioned on compliance.
Should probation be granted or reinstated post-suspension?	No probation; reinstatement conditional on strict compliance.	Probation plan insufficient and not in public interest.	Probation denied; reinstatement conditioned on specified treatment and monitoring if suspensions are lifted.

In re Millett, 291 Kan. 369 (2010) (panel found 8.4(b) violation for obstruction of official duty)
In re Angst, 278 Kan. 500 (2004) (misdemeanor misconduct supported 8.4(b) finding)
In re Shores, 294 Kan. 680 (2012) (aggravating factor for not fully acknowledging wrongful conduct)
In re Wiechman, 290 Kan. 70 (2010) (aggravating factor for not fully appreciating misconduct)
In re Davidson, 285 Kan. 798 (2008) (finding insufficient acknowledgment of wrongdoing)
In re Walsh, 286 Kan. 235 (2008) (discusses standard for discipline review under Rule 211(f))