Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 94 Ohio St.3d 129.]

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. ALLEN.

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen, 2002-Ohio-4212.]

Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Indefinite suspension with credit for time served

under interim suspension—Conviction for perjury.

(No. 01-1137—Submitted September 19, 2001—Decided January 9, 2002.)

ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and

Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 00-94.

__________________

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} In March 1999, respondent, Doris H. Allen, last known address in

Covington, Kentucky, Attorney Registration No. 0040292, was convicted by a jury

of perjury in violation of R.C. 2921.11(A), tampering with evidence in violation of

R.C. 2921.12(A)(2), and tampering with records in violation of R.C.

2913.42(A)(1).1 After merging the first two convictions into the single perjury

conviction, the trial court sentenced respondent to one year in prison for these

offenses, the facts of which also underlay a previous disciplinary complaint that a

majority of this court dismissed in 1998. See Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Allen (1998),

82 Ohio St.3d 550, 550-553, 697 N.E.2d 189, 189-191 (Moyer, C.J., dissenting),

and reconsideration denied (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 1203, 1203-1206, 702 N.E.2d

101, 101-103 (Lundberg Stratton, J., concurring). In December 2000, relator,

Office of Disciplinary Counsel, filed a complaint charging that respondent’s

conviction constituted violations of DR 1-102(A)(3) (illegal conduct involving

moral turpitude), 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or

1. On August 11, 1999, respondent was suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for an interim

period pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(4). See In re Houser Allen (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 1451, 714

N.E.2d 403.

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of

justice), and 7-102(A)(7) (assisting a client in conduct the lawyer knows to be

illegal or fraudulent).

{¶ 2} Respondent was apparently served with a copy of the complaint while

incarcerated, but did not answer,2 and relator filed a motion for default pursuant to

Gov.Bar R. V(6)(F)(1). A master commissioner for the Board of Commissioners

on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”) considered the

motion and recommended that respondent be found in violation of the charged

Disciplinary Rules and that she be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law

in Ohio. On further review, the board adopted the master commissioner’s findings

of fact and conclusions of law, as well as the recommended sanction.

{¶ 3} We concur in the board’s recommendation, as modified. In 1996,

while representing Sylvia Huff in the attempt to procure custody of Huff’s children,

respondent dictated and had Huff sign an affidavit alleging that the children’s father

had “threatened” Huff and her children and was “armed and dangerous.” A jury

determined that respondent knew these allegations to be untrue. Respondent then

had Huff file a complaint charging the children’s father with domestic violence

based on the false affidavit. The father was subsequently arrested and taken into

custody as a result.

{¶ 4} By oath or affirmation upon admission to the bar, an attorney

promises to act as an officer of the court in abiding by our Code of Professional

Responsibility and upholding the laws of this country and this state. Gov.Bar R.

I(8)(A). Few infractions so impugn the integrity of our judicial system as do the

crimes of perjury and tampering with court evidence or records.

2. Respondent corresponded with relator twice during the investigation, both times indicating that

she did not want to respond and that she wanted to resign from the practice of law. To date, however,

respondent has not documented her resignation.

2

January Term, 2002

{¶ 5} Accordingly, respondent is hereby ordered suspended from the

practice of law in Ohio for an indefinite period to commence upon the date of our

order; however, respondent is given credit for the time she has served since August

11, 1999, the date of her interim suspension. Costs are taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ.,

concur.

LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., not participating.

__________________

Jonathan E. Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, and Lori J. Brown, First

Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

__________________

3