Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Wolfson

102 Ohio St. 3d 405 (Ohio 2004) · Supreme Court of Ohio · July 14, 2004

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court indefinitely suspended Richard Evan Wolfson from practicing law after his conviction for tampering with evidence. The court adopted conditions requiring participation in lawyer-support services, continuing treatment, medication compliance, and medical certification before readmission. The court denied credit for time served under the interim suspension and taxed costs to respondent.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Moyer, C.J.; Resnick; F.E. Sweeney; Pfeifer; O'Connor; O'Donnell; Lundberg Stratton
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
July 14, 2004
Procedural posture
Attorney-discipline proceeding arising from respondent's felony conviction for tampering with evidence. The Supreme Court reviewed the board's recommendation of an indefinite suspension.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court independently reviewed and adopted the board's findings, conclusions, and recommended sanction.
Precedential value
Published Ohio Supreme Court opinion; precedential
Parties
Ohio State Bar Association v. Richard Evan Wolfson
Disposition
other

Topics

remediesprobationcriminal procedure

Practice areas

legal ethics and professional responsibilityattorney disciplinesubstance dependency and attorney fitness

Questions Presented

  1. What professional-discipline sanction was appropriate for respondent's felony conviction and related ethical violations?
  2. Whether the absence of a qualified professional prognosis that respondent could return to competent and ethical practice justified an indefinite suspension rather than a fixed two-year suspension.
  3. What conditions should govern respondent's reinstatement to the practice of law?

Holdings

  1. An indefinite suspension from the practice of law was the appropriate sanction, rather than the stipulated two-year suspension, because the record lacked a qualified professional prognosis that respondent could return to competent and ethical practice under specified conditions.
  2. Reinstatement was conditioned on active participation in the Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program, continuing treatment for respondent's substance dependencies and psychiatric disorders, compliance with prescribed medication, proof of those requirements when seeking readmission, and a recent qualified professional report establishing respondent's capacity to withstand the pressures of practice and that his conditions would not impair his practice.

Key quotations

For this reason, we find an indefinite suspension from the practice of law under the conditions set forth by the board, with no credit for time served, to be the more appropriate sanction. (¶ 20)

Factual background

Richard Evan Wolfson, an Ohio attorney, was convicted of third-degree felony tampering with evidence after writing and signing an unsworn false statement concerning when an unconscious man had arrived at Wolfson's apartment. Wolfson had a longstanding history of alcohol and drug dependence and diagnosed psychiatric conditions, but entered treatment and presented evidence of ongoing recovery. His participation in a supervised community-control program ended early after repeated rule violations.

Procedural history

Respondent was convicted of felony tampering with evidence after pleading no contest and was placed on interim suspension. The relator then charged him with four violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility. A hearing panel adopted the parties' stipulated two-year suspension subject to conditions; the board adopted the findings but recommended an indefinite suspension with conditions and no credit for the interim suspension. The Supreme Court adopted the board's findings, conclusions, and recommendation, with modified reinstatement conditions.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…