Summary
adopting the Board's recommended sanction of a public censure for a single instance of dishonesty where neither party took exception to that recommendation
Summary of this case from In re TunOpinion
No. 20-BG-270
08-13-2020
IN RE Wayne Robert ROHDE, Respondent. A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 421213)
Per Curiam:
The Board on Professional Responsibility adopted a Hearing Committee's findings that respondent Wayne Robert Rohde violated Virginia Rules 3.3(a)(1) and 8.4(c), and the Board recommends that respondent be publicly censured. Specifically, the Committee found by clear and convincing evidence that respondent knowingly made a false statement to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in connection with an application to be admitted to that court pro hac vice, by representing that there had not been any action in any court pertaining to his conduct or fitness as a member of the bar, even though respondent knew that this court had referred his criminal felony conviction to the Board on Professional Responsibility in 2006 to determine what action should be taken. The Committee also found by clear and convincing evidence that respondent misled the attorney sponsoring his pro hac vice application, by failing to disclose to her the prior conviction and the related disciplinary proceedings.
Under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(h)(2), "if no exceptions are filed to the Board's report, the [c]ourt will enter an order imposing the discipline recommended by the Board upon the expiration of the time permitted for filing exceptions." See also In re Viehe , 762 A.2d 542, 543 (D.C. 2000) (per curiam) ("When ... there are no exceptions to the Board's report and recommendation, our deferential standard of review becomes even more deferential."). Neither respondent nor Disciplinary Counsel has filed exceptions to the Board's Report and Recommendation, and we are satisfied that the Board's recommendation is supported by substantial evidence. We see no reason to reject the discipline recommended by the Board. See id. at 543.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that respondent Wayne Robert Rohde is hereby publicly censured.
So ordered.