Opinion
D.D. No. 58
Decided May 27, 1964.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Impeding administration of justice — Disciplinary action — Suspension from practice for indefinite period.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
The relator, the Cincinnati Bar Association, filed a complaint against the respondent, Robert D. Leggett, charging him with misconduct as an attorney at law by reason of his commission and conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.
A hearing was had before the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. The board found that respondent was indicted in a federal court in Kentucky for impeding the administration of justice in that he told another to burn certain records which respondent knew would be relevant to an inquiry then being conducted by a federal grand jury; that respondent was tried and found guilty as charged; that after conviction respondent was fined $1,000 and sentenced to jail for a period of three months, which jail sentence was suspended and respondent placed on probation for one year; and that during the time of such occurrences respondent was engaged in the practice of law with offices in Cincinnati, Ohio.
The respondent admitted the truth of the foregoing charge and the conviction and offered evidence in mitigation of his offense.
The board concluded that respondent was guilty of misconduct involving moral turpitude and of violation of the Canons of Professional Ethics, and that his conduct has been such as to bring discredit upon the legal profession.
The board recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for an indefinite period.
The matter is now before this court for consideration of the report of the board and the objections of respondent.
Mr. Peter Outcalt and Mr. Robert M. Dennis, for relator.
Mr. Clifford E. Adams, for respondent.
It is the duty of an attorney, an officer of the court, to aid in the administration of justice. The commission, by an attorney, of the crime of impeding the administration of justice is the commission of a crime involving moral turpitude, w hich brings discredit upon himself and disrepute upon the legal profession. This court is of the opinion that the board was neither in error nor unreasonable in its recommendation.
The objections to the recommendation of the board are overruled, the report of the board is confirmed, and judgment is rendered suspending respondent for an indefinite period from the practice of law.
Report confirmed and judgment accordingly.
TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, GRIFFITH, HERBERT and GIBSON, JJ., concur.