From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Barr

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jul 26, 1999
518 S.E.2d 823 (S.C. 1999)

Summary

concluding ninety-day suspension was the appropriate sanction where lawyer pled guilty to one count of failure to file a South Carolina Income Tax Return

Summary of this case from In re Cromartie

Opinion

No. 24979

Submitted June 28, 1999

Decided July 26, 1999

G. Wells Dickson, Jr., of Charleston, for respondent.

Senior Assistant Attorney General James G. Bogle, Jr., of Columbia, for the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel.


DEFINITE SUSPENSION


In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an agreement under Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In the agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to be suspended from the practice of law for ninety days. We accept the agreement.

Respondent pled guilty to one count of failing to file a South Carolina Income Tax Return for tax year 1993 in violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 12-54-40(b)(6)(c) (Supp. 1998). Respondent was sentenced to a fine of $1,000.00.

The failure to file a tax return is a serious crime as set forth in Rule 2(z), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. By his conduct, respondent has violated Rule 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR, and Rule 7(a)(4), RLDE, by committing a serious crime.that reflects adversely upon his honesty, trustworthiness and fitness as a lawyer and has violated Rule 7(a)(5) and (6), RLDE, by engaging in conduct tending to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute and violating the oath of office he took upon admission to the practice of law in this State.

In our opinion, respondent's misconduct warrants a definite suspension from the practice of law for ninety days. Accordingly, respondent is suspended for ninety days, retroactive to June 2, 1999, the date of his interim suspension. Within fifteen days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an affidavit with the Clerk of Court showing that he has complied with Rule 30, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR.

DEFINITE SUSPENSION.


Summaries of

In re Barr

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jul 26, 1999
518 S.E.2d 823 (S.C. 1999)

concluding ninety-day suspension was the appropriate sanction where lawyer pled guilty to one count of failure to file a South Carolina Income Tax Return

Summary of this case from In re Cromartie

concluding ninety-day suspension was the appropriate sanction where lawyer pled guilty to one count of failure to file a South Carolina Income Tax Return

Summary of this case from In re Cromartie
Case details for

In re Barr

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Charles David Barr, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jul 26, 1999

Citations

518 S.E.2d 823 (S.C. 1999)
518 S.E.2d 823

Citing Cases

In re Cromartie

uspension was warranted where lawyer pled guilty in federal court to seven counts of willfully failing to…

In re Cromartie

uspension was warranted where lawyer pled guilty in federal court to seven counts of willfully failing to…