Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Wrenn

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed professional-discipline charges against an assistant prosecutor who failed to disclose verbal DNA-test results and a victim's changed account in a criminal case. The court found violations of four Disciplinary Rules and imposed a six-month suspension from practice, staying the entire suspension and taxing costs to the respondent.

Holdings

1. A prosecutor with a duty to disclose discoverable information may not withhold known exculpatory information merely because the information was communicated orally, had not yet been reduced to a written laboratory report, or might be hearsay. Wrenn violated his professional obligations by failing to disclose the DNA results and the victim's changed account.
2. A six-month suspension from the practice of law, stayed in its entirety, was appropriate where the respondent committed multiple disclosure violations but had substantial mitigating circumstances, including no prior discipline, good character, cooperation, and no dishonest or selfish motive.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wrenn violated his professional obligations by failing to disclose known exculpatory DNA information and the victim's changed account to the defense and court.
2. Whether the appropriate sanction was an actual six-month suspension or a six-month suspension stayed in its entirety in light of the violations and mitigating circumstances.

Disposition

other