Disciplinary Counsel v. Parker

116 Ohio St. 3d 64 · Supreme Court of Ohio · October 25, 2007

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary charges against George M. Parker, a Mason Municipal Court judge, arising from repeated improper, coercive, intemperate, and dishonest conduct. The court found violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct and Code of Professional Responsibility and imposed an 18-month suspension from the practice of law, with six months stayed subject to conditions. The court rejected respondent's argument that narcissistic personality disorder and other mitigating factors warranted a more lenient sanction.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Per curiam; Moyer, C.J.; Pfeifer; Lundberg Stratton; O'Connor; O'Donnell; Lanzinger; Cupp
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
October 25, 2007
Procedural posture
Attorney-discipline proceeding arising from a seven-count complaint alleging judicial and professional misconduct. The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline recommended an eighteen-month suspension, with six months stayed on conditions; Parker objected to the recommendation.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court of Ohio independently reviewed the disciplinary record, findings, objections, and recommended sanction.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the Supreme Court of Ohio
Parties
Disciplinary Counsel v. George M. Parker
Disposition
other

Topics

municipal lawcriminal procedureadministrative law

Practice areas

legal ethicsjudicial disciplineprofessional responsibilitycriminal proceduremunicipal law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Parker violated the Code of Judicial Conduct and Code of Professional Responsibility through the conduct established in the seven counts.
  2. Whether Parker's narcissistic personality disorder qualified as a mitigating factor under BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(2)(g).
  3. Whether the recommended eighteen-month suspension, with the final six months stayed on conditions, was an appropriate sanction.
  4. Whether Parker should also be suspended without pay from his office as a Mason Municipal Court judge.

Holdings

  1. Parker committed 23 violations of eight judicial Canons and eight violations of three Disciplinary Rules through repeated abuse of judicial authority, bias, coercion, intemperance, discourtesy, ex parte conduct, and dishonesty.
  2. A lawyer seeking significant mitigation based on mental disability must prove all four regulatory elements: diagnosis by a qualified health-care professional, causation of the misconduct, a sustained period of successful treatment, and a qualified prognosis that the lawyer will be able to return to competent, ethical, and professional practice.
  3. Parker's narcissistic personality disorder did not excuse his inconsistent, untrue, and deceptive explanations or eliminate their aggravating effect.
  4. An eighteen-month suspension from the practice of law, with the final six months stayed on specified conditions, was appropriate; Parker was also concurrently suspended without pay from his judicial office.

Key quotations

For a mental disability to qualify as mitigating under BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(2)(g), the record must contain the following: (at 74)
Evidence suggesting that the lawyer may be able to practice competently and in accordance with ethical and professional standards is not nearly enough. (at 77)
The submission of false or deceptive statements in response to an investigation of professional misconduct is an aggravating factor and also manifests dishonesty and a failure to acknowledge wrongdoing. (at 81)

Factual background

Parker, while serving as a municipal court judge, repeatedly engaged in abusive, biased, coercive, intemperate, and dishonest conduct. Among other acts, he jailed a courtroom spectator for contempt without cause, presided over a defendant's plea and sentencing after participating in the defendant's arrest, attempted to coerce plea agreements, mistreated domestic-violence victims and defendants, misused the 911 emergency system, and made an inappropriate telephone call to an alleged drug dealer during a hearing. Parker also gave inconsistent and untrue accounts of several incidents during the disciplinary investigation and hearing.

Procedural history

Disciplinary Counsel filed a seven-count complaint against Parker, a Mason Municipal Court judge and Ohio attorney. After a three-member panel hearing involving extensive stipulations, the panel found misconduct and recommended an eighteen-month suspension with six months stayed. The Board adopted virtually all findings and the recommendation, and the Supreme Court of Ohio reviewed and rejected Parker's objections.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…