When we do impose discipline, this Court strives toward some degree of proportionality -- to impose discipline that is consistent with that imposed on other lawyers for similar misconduct. State ex rel. OBA v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250. In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, we may also consider the severity of the discipline imposed by the other jurisdiction in assessing what discipline, if any, is appropriate in Oklahoma.

¶5 This cause is not the first time Respondent has found himself subject to reciprocal disciplinary proceedings before this Court pursuant to Rule 7.7, RGDP. In State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, this Court publicly censured Respondent based upon discipline in Arizona for negligently filing improper arbitration certificates and for failing to notify the General Counsel of his discipline in Arizona as required by Rule 7.7, RGDP. 2013 OK 16, ¶ 6, 297 P.3d 1248. ¶6 The Supreme Court of Oklahoma possesses a nondelegable, constitutional responsibility to regulate the practice of law and the licensure, ethics, and discipline of legal practitioners in this state.

It is within this Courts discretion to visit the same discipline as that imposed in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250. ¶7 We may consider whether the sanction imposed by the affected jurisdiction is sufficient to stop the offending conduct and effectively serve "the purpose of discipline--protecting the courts, the public, and the legal system."

In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, we have discretion to impose the same discipline as in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250 (citing Patterson, 2001 OK 51, ¶ 33, 28 P.3d at 561). This Court endeavors to satisfy the legitimate goals of administering professional discipline to attorneys for their misconduct and to deter similar conduct by other attorneys.

State of Okla. ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Patterson, 2001 OK 51, ¶ 33, 28 P.3d 551, 561. Our primary goal is to safeguard the interest of the public, the judiciary, and the legal profession, while trying to deter similar future misconduct by other attorneys. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250. To determine what measure of discipline is proper, we are guided by discipline imposed upon other lawyers for similar acts of professional misconduct.

In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, "it is within this Court's discretion to visit the same discipline as that imposed in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity." State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith , 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248 ; State of Okla. ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Patterson, 2001 OK 51, ¶ 33, 28 P.3d 551.III. ANALYSIS

In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, "it is within this Court's discretion to visit the same discipline as that imposed in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity." State of Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Patterson, 2001 OK 51, ¶ 33, 28 P.3d 551 ; State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Kleinsmith , 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248. ANALYSIS

We also strive to impose a quantum of discipline upon an offending lawyer that is consistent with that imposed upon other lawyers for similar acts of professional misconduct. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith , 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250. Crafting the appropriate discipline requires consideration of the goals of discipline set in the context and accompanying complexities of each case.¶ 31 The Court in Tweedy was persuaded that the sanctions meted out by the federal courts had worked to stop the offending conduct and effectively served the purpose of discipline—protecting the courts, the public, and the legal system.

¶26 "In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, it is within this Court's discretion to visit the same discipline as that imposed in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity." State ex rel. OBA v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248, 1250. This Court has imposed discipline for neglect of a client's matters, and the discipline has ranged from a public censure to two years' suspension.

¶ 23 In reciprocal disciplinary proceedings, it is within the discretion of this Court to impose the same discipline as that imposed in the other jurisdiction or one of greater or lesser severity. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Knight, 2014 OK 71, ¶ 14, 330 P.3d 1216 ; State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, 2013 OK 16, ¶ 4, 297 P.3d 1248 ; Patterson, 2001 OK 51, ¶ 33, 28 P.3d 551. This Court has imposed a wide range of discipline for misconduct involving lack of candor to a tribunal, misrepresentations, and presentation of false statements, ranging from no discipline to disbarment from the practice of law. This Court has previously stated that “[h]onesty and integrity are the cornerstones of the legal profession.