Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. James A. Weaver
2012 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 24
| Iowa | 2012Background
- Weaver pled guilty to OWI third offense (class D felony) in 2009 and to third-degree harassment (simple misdemeanor); he was previously suspended and reprimanded for prior OWIs, with ongoing alcoholism and depression.
- Board alleged Weaver violated Iowa Rule of Professional Conduct 32:8.4(b) based on criminal acts reflecting on honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer.
- Grievance Commission found a sua sponte violation for the OWI third offense and recommended concurrent suspension with his disability suspension, plus medical proof of sobriety and fitness before reinstatement.
- Weaver’s disability suspension was already in place since May 4, 2009 due to depression and alcoholism; he faced parole violations and renewed prison terms related to substantiated conduct.
- The Iowa Supreme Court conducted a de novo review of misconduct and sanctions, applying Templeton factors to assess nexus between conduct and fitness to practice law.
- Court held that the disciplinary sanction should be two years’ suspension with conditions and that the disability suspension remains in place until fully cured and reinstated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does OWI third offense violate 32:8.4(b)? | Board argues conviction reflects adversely on fitness. | Weaver contends no per se rule; must show nexus per Templeton factors. | Yes; sufficient nexus to violate 32:8.4(b). |
| Does harassment conviction support 32:8.4(b)? | Board asserts harassment reflects on fitness. | Weaver argues lack of pattern and lack of direct relation to practice. | Yes; harassment, with multiple victims and risk to others, reflects on fitness. |
| What is the appropriate sanction for Weaver’s misconduct? | Board recommends two-year suspension concurrent with disability suspension, with sobriety/fitness conditions. | Weaver argues reinstatement delay unnecessary beyond disability suspension. | Two-year suspension with conditions; concurrent with disability suspension; costs assigned. |
| Should disability suspension affect reinstatement timing? | Disability suspension not a sanction; must separately address reinstatement with fitness and sobriety requirements; suspension runs to two years from opinion date. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Templeton, 784 N.W.2d 761 (Iowa 2010) (de novo review; factors to assess nexus between crime and fitness)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Keele, 795 N.W.2d 507 (Iowa 2011) (no rule 32:8.4(b) violation without sufficient nexus)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Johnson, 774 N.W.2d 496 (Iowa 2009) (permitted use of prior OWI conviction as aggravating factor in sanction)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Marcucci, 543 N.W.2d 879 (Iowa 1996) (six-factor approach to rule 32:8.4(b) analysis; pattern of conduct)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Ruth, 636 N.W.2d 86 (Iowa 2001) (six-month suspension for limited companion misconduct; multi-issue approach)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Hauser, 782 N.W.2d 147 (Iowa 2010) (mitigating factor of alcoholism and then-consideration in sanctioning)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Curtis, 749 N.W.2d 694 (Iowa 2008) (mitigating factors in sanctioning for discipline)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Van Beek, 757 N.W.2d 639 (Iowa 2008) (disability suspension not itself a sanction; separate discipline)