History
  • No items yet
midpage
66 Ohio St. 3d 369
Ohio
1993

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings but not the recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months. Costs taxed to the respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Wright and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., concur. Douglas, J., dissents with opinion. Resnick, J., dissents and would follow the panel’s recommendation that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would suspend respondent for two years, but would stay the suspension during respondent’s good behavior.





Dissenting Opinion

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. I respectfully dissent. This young man made a mistake. Haven’t we all? To make an example of respondent so that the message is sent that “ * * * prosecutors are fully accountable for such actions” is not, in my judgment, justice.

I would suspend respondent for a period of six months, and I would stay the suspension during good behavior.

Case Details

Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Jun 16, 1993
Citations: 66 Ohio St. 3d 369; 613 N.E.2d 178; 1993 Ohio LEXIS 1211; No. 92-2536
Docket Number: No. 92-2536
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified
and are not legal advice.
Log In
    Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones, 66 Ohio St. 3d 369