Case Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Gettys

Citation: 2000-Ohio-60

Docket Number: 20000761

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2000-10-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Gettys, 90 Ohio St.3d 250, 2000-Ohio-60.] 
 
 
 
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. GETTYS. 
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Gettys (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 250.] 
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Two-year suspension with second year stayed 
and probation with conditions for the entire two years — Convictions for 
possession of a controlled substance and operating a motor vehicle while 
under the influence — Practicing law while not registered with the Clerk 
of the Supreme Court of Ohio. 
(No. 00-761 — Submitted July 6, 2000 — Decided October 25, 2000.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 97-09. 
 
On April 10, 1996, respondent, Robert Patrick Gettys of Covington, 
Kentucky, Attorney Registration No. 0032534, was found guilty of felony 
possession of a controlled substance and the misdemeanor of operating a motor 
vehicle while under the influence.  On June 20, 1996, the Supreme Court of 
Kentucky suspended respondent from the practice of law, and on September 25, 
1996, we indefinitely  suspended respondent from the practice of law in Ohio.  In 
re Gettys (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 1486, 669 N.E.2d 1155.  On February 18, 1997, 
relator, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, filed a complaint charging respondent 
with several violations of the Code of  Professional Responsibility.  Respondent 
answered, and the matter was submitted to a panel of the Board of Commissioners 
on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”). 
 
The panel concluded that respondent’s conduct, which resulted in his 
convictions for possession of a controlled substance and operating a motor vehicle 
while under the influence, violated DR 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in illegal conduct 
involving moral turpitude) and 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct that adversely 
reflects upon an attorney’s fitness to practice law). 
 
 
2 
 
The panel further found that respondent was late in registering with the 
Clerk of the Supreme Court of Ohio in each biennium beginning with 1985-1986 
and continuing through 1997-1998.  It found that while he was not registered with 
the court respondent continued to practice law in Ohio.  It concluded that 
respondent’s actions in practicing law while not registered violated DR 1-
102(A)(5) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), 1-
102(A)(6), and 3-101(B) (practicing law in violation of the regulations of the 
profession in that jurisdiction). 
 
Mitigation evidence established that in 1996, respondent received thirty 
days of in-patient drug and alcohol treatment, after which he completed his thirty-
day jail sentence and that he is no longer drinking or motivated to drink.  
Respondent submitted several letters from judges, members of the bar, and his 
local community, attesting to his character and ability to practice law. 
 
The panel recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice 
of law for two years with one of those years stayed, but that he remain on 
probation for the entire two years under the following conditions: first, that he be 
subject to random testing for drug or alcohol use; second, that he attend three 
Alcoholics Anonymous meetings each week and document such attendance; third, 
that he make quarterly visits to a psychologist; fourth, that an attorney appointed 
by the relator monitor these terms and  conditions of probation and report 
compliance with them quarterly to the relator.  The board adopted the findings, 
conclusions, and recommendation of the panel. 
__________________ 
 
Jonathan E. Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, for relator. 
 
Robert Patrick Gettys, pro se. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of 
the board.  Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for two years 
 
 
3 
with the second year stayed.  Respondent shall remain on probation for the entire 
two years under the following conditions: first, that he be subject to random 
testing for drug or alcohol use; second, that he attend three Alcoholics 
Anonymous meetings each week and document such attendance; third, that he 
make quarterly visits to a psychologist; fourth, that an attorney appointed by the 
relator monitor these terms and  conditions of probation and report compliance 
with them quarterly to the relator.  Costs are taxed to respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.