STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. SHAHAN, 2017 OK 10

Ian M. Shahan, admitted 2009, pleaded guilty/no contest to three Tulsa misdemeanor charges: Public Intoxication (Nov. 15, 2014), Driving Under the Influence and Leaving Scene of Collision Involving Property Damage (Feb. 6, 2015).
Browser facts: at VFW bar he threatened a bartender; later crashed into a utility pole with a .22 BAC, walked home, then was arrested. No third parties or clients were harmed.
He self-reported the arrests to the Oklahoma Bar Association, cooperated with the investigation, and pursued treatment: DUI/substance assessment, AA, Lawyers Helping Lawyers, volunteering and speaking in prevention programs.
Trial Panel recommended a six-month suspension (retroactive to Feb. 1, 2016) plus a deferred 12-month suspension with probationary conditions, finding sincere remorse and substantial mitigation.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court reviewed de novo, concluded the recommended six-month suspension was excessive, lifted the interim suspension, imposed a public censure, found the one-year deferred suspension satisfied, and ordered payment of costs totaling $2,546.60.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (OBA)	Defendant's Argument (Shahan)	Held
Whether Shahan's criminal pleas demonstrate unfitness to practice law under RGDP Rule 7.1	Convictions reflecting conduct adverse to the profession warrant discipline	Convictions were misdemeanors, out-of-character, no client harm, and followed by remediation	Court: Convictions provide basis for discipline but do not in this record show unfitness requiring suspension; public censure appropriate
Appropriate quantum of discipline for alcohol-related misconduct	Suspension recommended by Trial Panel (6 months + deferred year) given seriousness of offenses	Mitigation: prompt self-reporting, treatment, sustained sobriety, strong character testimony — recommend lesser discipline	Court: Reduced discipline to public censure and lifted interim suspension given mitigation and comparable precedents
Conditions and enforcement (probation/deferred suspension monitoring)	Recommended probationary conditions and monitoring (Lawyers Helping Lawyers, abstinence, waiver of confidentiality for monitoring)	Accepted conditions and had complied, seeking lifting of interim suspension	Court: Deferred suspension conditions had been satisfied; imposed ongoing expectations (abide by Rules, monitoring requirements noted)

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Kinsey, 212 P.3d 1186 (2009) (appellate de novo review of Trial Panel findings in disciplinary proceedings)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Cooley, 304 P.3d 453 (2013) (felony DUI did not facially demonstrate unfitness to practice law)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Giger, 37 P.3d 856 (2001) (mitigation credit where lawyer cooperates and pursues treatment for substance abuse)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Bernhardt, 323 P.3d 222 (2014) (multiple DUI convictions can establish a pattern showing indifference to legal obligations)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Burns, 145 P.3d 1088 (2006) (six-month suspension and probation for repeated alcohol-related felonies, mitigation via treatment acknowledged)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. McBride, 175 P.3d 379 (2007) (public censure with deferred suspension where attorney embraced sobriety and no client harm shown)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Garrett, 127 P.3d 600 (2005) (public censure and probation for misconduct tied to chronic alcoholism; treatment considered)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Armstrong, 791 P.2d 815 (1990) (not every criminal conviction demonstrates unfitness to practice law)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Anderson, 109 P.3d 326 (2005) (Trial Panel recommendations are persuasive but not binding on the Court)