Case Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller

Citation: 1997-Ohio-24

Docket Number: 

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1997-06-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller. 
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller (1997), ____Ohio St.3d ____.] 
Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- One-year suspension with credit 
for time served -- Conviction for aiding and abetting the filing 
of a false corporate tax return. 
 
(No. 97-437 -- Submitted April 16, 1997 -- Decided June 25, 1997.) 
 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances 
and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 96-07. 
 
On May 3, 1995, respondent, John R. Miller of Fairlawn, Ohio, 
Attorney Registration No. 0015201, pled guilty in federal district court to 
aiding and abetting the filing of a false tax return in violation of Section 
7206(2), Title 26, U.S. Code.  On September 14, 1995, we suspended 
respondent from the practice of law in Ohio pending investigation by 
relator, Office of Disciplinary Counsel. 
 
On February 5, 1996, relator filed a complaint charging that 
respondent’s conduct resulting in his conviction constituted violations of 
DR 1-102(A)(3)(engaging in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude), 1-
102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or 
 
2
misrepresentation), and 7-102(A)(7) (counseling or assisting a client in 
illegal or fraudulent conduct). 
 
The parties stipulated before a panel of the Board of Commissioners 
on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”) that from 
November 1989 through August 1990, when the corporate tax return of 
Diversified Holdings, Inc. was filed, respondent advised and counseled 
James Dipolito, a director of the corporation, to file a false tax return.  
Respondent pled guilty to this felony, was convicted, and was sentenced to 
two years of probation during which time he was to give four hundred hours 
of community service.  The federal court also required respondent to donate 
$3,000 to a community service project in which he participated, and to pay a 
$100 administrative fee.  The court terminated respondent’s probation on 
July 26, 1996. 
 
The panel, after finding the facts as stipulated, concluded that 
respondent had violated DR 1-102(A)(4) and 7-102(A)(7).  Because 
respondent had no prior disciplinary violations, had cooperated with the 
investigation, and did not profit from the acts which constituted the 
violations, the panel recommended that respondent be suspended from the 
 
3
practice of law for one year with credit for time served.  The board adopted 
the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the panel. 
___________________________________ 
 
Geoffrey Stern, Disciplinary Counsel, and Harald F. Craig III, 
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator. 
 
Frank M. Pignatelli, for respondent. 
___________________________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We agree with the findings, conclusions, and 
recommendation of the board.  We hereby suspend respondent from the 
practice of law for one year with credit for time served since his interim 
suspension was imposed.  Costs are taxed to respondent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
DOUGLAS, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., 
concur. 
 
MOYER, C.J., AND RESNICK, J., dissent because they would not 
give respondent credit for time served. 
 
COOK, J., not participating.