In the Matter of Everett E. Powell II

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court disbarred Everett E. Powell II for falsifying evidence and knowingly making false statements to the Court and the Disciplinary Commission in an effort to obtain reinstatement. The Court held that Powell violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(b), and 8.4(c), and assessed the proceeding’s costs against him.

Holdings

1. An attorney violates Rule 3.3(a)(1) by knowingly making a false statement of material fact to a tribunal or by failing to correct a previously made false statement, even when the false statement appears in a pleading prepared and filed by counsel, where the attorney supplied or adopted the false information.
2. Falsifying a document violates Rule 3.4(b) when the document is created with the intent that it be used as evidence, even if the falsification occurs before the proceeding in which the document is later tendered.
3. An attorney engages in professional misconduct under Rule 8.4(c) when the attorney knowingly uses a false receipt and false restitution representations as part of a scheme involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
4. The admission of T.G.'s videotaped deposition was permissible because Powell and his counsel received notice and an opportunity to participate, counsel did not object and elected not to attend, and the applicable trial and evidence rules permitted use of the deposition in the disciplinary proceeding.
5. Disbarment was warranted for Powell's falsification of evidence and repeated knowing false statements made in an effort to obtain reinstatement, particularly in light of his prior discipline, continuing dishonesty, lack of candor, and failure to make restitution.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Powell violated Professional Conduct Rule 3.3(a)(1) by knowingly making or failing to correct false statements of material fact to the Supreme Court and the Disciplinary Commission.
2. Whether Powell violated Professional Conduct Rule 3.4(b) by creating and later submitting a falsified receipt as evidence.
3. Whether Powell violated Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(c) through conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
4. Whether admitting T.G.'s videotaped deposition violated Powell's due-process rights or Indiana Trial Rule 32(A)(3) and Evidence Rule 804(b)(1).
5. What sanction was appropriate for Powell's misconduct.

Disposition

other