Case Title: Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Haynes

Citation: 2015-Ohio-3706

Docket Number: 

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2015-09-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Haynes, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-3706.] 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2015-OHIO-3706 
CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN BAR ASSOCIATION v. HAYNES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Haynes, Slip Opinion  
No. 2015-Ohio-3706.] 
Attorneys—Misconduct—Felony conviction for receiving stolen property—Two-
year suspension with six months stayed on condition and with no credit for 
time served under interim felony suspension. 
(No. 2015-0277—Submitted April 14, 2015—Decided September 16, 2015.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Professional Conduct 
of the Supreme Court, No. 2014-025. 
__________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Respondent, Dawn Trinah Haynes of Cleveland, Ohio, Attorney 
Registration No. 0074001, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 2001.  
On May 7, 2013, we suspended Haynes’s license on an interim basis upon 
receiving notice that she had been convicted of a felony.  In re Haynes, 135 Ohio 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
St.3d 1308, 2013-Ohio 1851, 988 N.E.2d 568.  And on November 1, 2013, we 
imposed an additional suspension based on her failure to register for the 2013-
2015 biennium.  In re Attorney Registration Suspension of Haynes, 136 Ohio 
St.3d 1544, 2013-Ohio-4827, 996 N.E.2d 973. 
{¶ 2} On March 14, 2014, relator, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar 
Association, filed a complaint alleging that the conduct that resulted in Haynes’s 
April 2013 conviction for receiving stolen property involved dishonesty, fraud, 
deceit, or misrepresentation that adversely reflected on her honesty or 
trustworthiness and her fitness to practice law.  The parties subsequently 
submitted joint stipulations of fact, misconduct, and aggravating and mitigating 
factors, and they recommended that Haynes be suspended for two years, with the 
final six months stayed on conditions, with credit for the time served under her 
interim felony suspension.  A panel of the Board of Professional Conduct adopted 
the parties’ stipulations and agreed that a two-year suspension with six months 
stayed and credit for time served is the appropriate sanction for Haynes’s 
misconduct.  The board adopted the panel report in its entirety. 
{¶ 3} We adopt the parties’ stipulations of fact and misconduct and 
aggravating and mitigating factors.  And while we agree that a two-year 
suspension with six months stayed on conditions is the appropriate sanction for 
Haynes’s misconduct, we decline to credit her for the time she has served under 
her interim felony suspension. 
Misconduct 
{¶ 4} A 41-count indictment issued in August 2011 alleged that Haynes, 
her husband, and ten other people had engaged in a pattern of stealing 
merchandise from big-box retailers in Summit County, returning the stolen 
merchandise to obtain cash refunds in the form of merchandise cards, using a cell 
phone registered to Haynes to check balances on the merchandise cards, and using 
an eBay account registered to Haynes to sell the merchandise cards.  Haynes 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
reported her indictment to relator.  She admits that she returned merchandise that 
she knew or should have known had been stolen by one or more of the other 
parties charged in the indictment to retailers and that in exchange for the returned 
merchandise she received merchandise cards.  She pleaded guilty to a single 
felony count of receiving stolen property in April 2013, for which she was 
sentenced to 24 months of community control and ordered to pay $1,500 in 
restitution.  Shortly after entering her guilty plea, she was terminated from her 
employment. 
{¶ 5} The parties stipulated and the board found that Haynes’s conduct 
violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b) (prohibiting a lawyer from committing an illegal act 
that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty or trustworthiness) and 8.4(c) 
(prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, 
deceit, or misrepresentation).  The parties additionally stipulated and the board 
found that the scheme and nature of deceiving retailers for her pecuniary gain 
justifies a separate finding that Haynes violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h) (prohibiting a 
lawyer from engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer’s fitness to 
practice law). 
Sanction 
{¶ 6} When imposing sanctions for attorney misconduct, we consider 
relevant factors, including the ethical duties that the lawyer violated and the 
sanctions imposed in similar cases.  Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli, 96 Ohio 
St.3d 424, 2002-Ohio-4743, 775 N.E.2d 818, ¶ 16.  In making a final 
determination, we also weigh evidence of the aggravating and mitigating factors 
listed in Gov.Bar R. V(13). 
{¶ 7} The parties stipulated to a single aggravating factor—that Haynes 
acted with a dishonest or selfish motive when she returned merchandise that she 
knew or should have known was stolen to obtain a pecuniary benefit.  See 
Gov.Bar R. V(13)(B)(2).  The board also noted that Haynes has an ongoing 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
attorney-registration suspension.  See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(B)(1).  The parties 
agreed that the relevant mitigating factors include the absence of a prior 
disciplinary record (other than the registration violation), Haynes’s timely good 
faith effort to make restitution or rectify the consequences of her misconduct, her 
full and free disclosure and cooperative attitude toward the disciplinary 
proceedings, the imposition of criminal penalties for her conduct, and her 
participation in an interim rehabilitation program administered by the Ohio 
Lawyers Assistance Program (“OLAP”) since March 2012.  See Gov.Bar R. 
V(13)(C)(1), (3), (4), (6), and (8). 
{¶ 8} The parties jointly recommended that Haynes be suspended from the 
practice of law for two years with six months of that suspension stayed and with 
credit for the time she has served under her interim felony suspension.  In support 
of that recommendation, the parties cited several cases involving comparable 
conduct in which we imposed sanctions ranging from 18 months to two years, 
with all or a portion of the suspension stayed on conditions.  See Disciplinary 
Counsel v. Grigsby, 128 Ohio St.3d 413, 2011-Ohio-1446, 945 N.E.2d 512 
(imposing an 18-month suspension, all stayed on conditions, on an attorney who 
pleaded guilty to first-degree misdemeanor misuse of a credit card after she used 
her employer’s corporate credit card for personal expenses); Disciplinary Counsel 
v. Kraemer, 126 Ohio St.3d 163, 2010-Ohio-3300, 931 N.E.2d 571 (suspending 
an attorney for two years with the second year stayed on conditions and with a 
one-year credit for time served under an interim felony suspension for 
misappropriating more than $7,000 from his law firm; mitigating factors included 
a mental-health diagnosis that contributed to the misconduct and the cessation of 
criminal activity before the attorney was caught); and Akron Bar Assn. v. Carter, 
115 Ohio St.3d 18, 2007-Ohio-4262, 873 N.E.2d 824 (suspending an attorney for 
two years with the final year stayed on conditions for misconduct that included 
felony convictions for theft and misuse of a credit card).  Finding these cases to be 
January Term, 2015 
 
5
instructive, the board agreed that a two-year suspension with six months stayed 
and with credit for the time served under her interim felony suspension is the 
appropriate sanction for Haynes’s misconduct. 
{¶ 9} We adopt the board’s findings and conclude that Haynes’s conduct 
violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b), (c), and (h).  We also agree that the appropriate 
sanction for Haynes’s misconduct is a two-year suspension with six months 
stayed on the condition that she commit no further misconduct.  However, we 
decline to credit Haynes for the time served under her interim suspension. 
{¶ 10} Accordingly, Dawn Trinah Haynes is hereby suspended from the 
practice of law in Ohio for two years, with the final six months stayed on the 
condition that she engage in no further misconduct.  She shall receive no credit 
for the time served under her interim felony suspension.  Costs are taxed to 
Haynes. 
Judgment accordingly. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, and FRENCH, JJ., 
concur. 
LANZINGER and O’NEILL, JJ., dissent, and would grant respondent credit 
for time served under interim suspension. 
_________________ 
Jordan D. Lebovitz and Brenda M. Johnson; and K. Ann Zimmerman, Bar 
Counsel, and Heather M. Zirke, Assistant Bar Counsel, for relator. 
Lester Potash, for respondent. 
_________________