Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that Robert Tracy Hoover violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h) by engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law. The court imposed a two-year suspension, credited the time served under his interim felony suspension, and conditioned reinstatement on compliance with community-control, psychological-assessment, treatment, and psychiatric-certification requirements.
Holdings
- Hoover's conduct adversely reflected on his fitness to practice law and violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h).
- A two-year suspension from the practice of law, with credit for time served under Hoover's interim felony suspension, was appropriate.
- Reinstatement must be conditioned on compliance with Hoover's criminal community-control requirements, a full psychological assessment and compliance with its recommendations, an OLAP contract and compliance with that contract, and a treating psychiatrist's opinion that Hoover can return to competent, ethical, and professional practice.
Questions Presented
- Whether Hoover's armed confrontation with a tenant, threats, property damage, and related social-media post constituted conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law in violation of Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h).
- What sanction was appropriate in light of the misconduct, mitigating factors, prior comparable disciplinary cases, and Hoover's mental-health treatment.
- What conditions should govern Hoover's reinstatement to the practice of law.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (8)
- In re Hoover, 161 Ohio St.3d 1268, 2020-Ohio-4774, 164 N.E.3d 496(followed)
- State v. Hoover, Scioto C.P. No. 19CR001195 (Dec. 20, 2019)(cited)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Howard, 123 Ohio St.3d 97, 2009-Ohio-4173, 914 N.E.2d 377(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Whitfield, 132 Ohio St.3d 284, 2012-Ohio-2708, 971 N.E.2d 915(followed)
- Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v. Blauvelt, 160 Ohio St.3d 333, 2020-Ohio-3325, 156 N.E.3d 891(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Corner, 160 Ohio St.3d 104, 2020-Ohio-961, 154 N.E.3d 23(followed)
- Toledo Bar Assn. v. Hales, 120 Ohio St.3d 340, 2008-Ohio-6201, 899 N.E.2d 130(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Oberholtzer, 136 Ohio St.3d 314, 2013-Ohio-3706, 995 N.E.2d 217(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…