State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Maddox, 2006 OK 95

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that John Glen Maddox's professional misconduct arising from his guilty plea to embezzlement by a public official warranted a two-year suspension from the practice of law. Due to substantial delays in the disciplinary proceedings and Maddox's self-imposed suspension, the suspension was made retroactive to March 22, 2005, and the court assessed $431.07 in costs.

Holdings

1. Maddox's guilty plea and conduct involving misuse of public funds and dishonesty warranted suspension of his license to practice law for two years, beginning retroactively on March 22, 2005.
2. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma is the ultimate arbiter of appropriate attorney discipline, is not bound by the trial panel's recommendations or agreed findings, and independently determines the sanction upon de novo review.
3. The extraordinary delay in this disciplinary proceeding failed to satisfy constitutional due-process and speedy-remedy concerns and was properly considered in determining the sanction.

Questions Presented

1. What discipline should be imposed for an attorney's guilty plea to embezzlement by a public official and related violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings?
2. Whether the substantial delay in the disciplinary proceedings constituted a due-process and speedy-remedy concern relevant to the sanction.
3. Whether the Supreme Court of Oklahoma was bound by the trial panel's recommended discipline or the parties' recommendations.

Disposition

other