Title: Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Riggs-Horton

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Riggs-Horton, Slip Opinion No. 2019-Ohio-4739.] 
 
 
 
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. 2019-OHIO-4739 
CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. RIGGS-HORTON. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Riggs-Horton, Slip Opinion No.  
2019-Ohio-4739.] 
Attorneys—Misconduct—Violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, namely, 
committing an illegal act that reflects adversely on a lawyer’s honesty or 
trustworthiness—Conditionally stayed six-month suspension. 
(No. 2018-1757—Submitted August 6, 2019—Decided November 20, 2019.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Professional Conduct of the Supreme 
Court, No. 2018-044. 
_______________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Respondent, Virginia M. Riggs-Horton, of Bellevue, Kentucky, 
Attorney Registration No. 0085302, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 
2009.  She is also admitted to the practice of law in Kentucky. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
{¶ 2} In a September 4, 2018 complaint, relator, Cincinnati Bar 
Association, charged Riggs-Horton with professional misconduct arising from her 
misdemeanor conviction for promoting contraband at a detention center.  The 
parties submitted stipulations of facts and misconduct and agree that a fully stayed 
six-month suspension is the appropriate sanction in this case. 
{¶ 3} The Board of Professional Conduct found that Riggs-Horton 
committed an illegal act that adversely reflected on her honesty or trustworthiness, 
recommended that a second alleged rule violation be dismissed, and agreed that a 
six-month suspension stayed in its entirety is the appropriate sanction for Riggs-
Horton’s misconduct.  We adopt the board’s findings of misconduct and 
recommended sanction. 
Misconduct 
{¶ 4} In 2017, Riggs-Horton was in a romantic relationship with Gary 
Chandler.  Chandler had been in and out of prison during the course of their 
relationship. 
{¶ 5} That August, Chandler was incarcerated in the Campbell County, 
Kentucky jail for a parole violation.  Riggs-Horton talked to Chandler on the phone 
daily, had personal visits with him at the jail twice a week, and visited him in her 
professional capacity as needed.  During Chandler’s incarceration, he was moved 
to the restricted-custody section of the jail. 
{¶ 6} Riggs-Horton had never been to the restricted-custody section before 
she made her first professional visit to Chandler there on August 19, 2017.  At the 
time of her visit, she was not aware of the facility’s rules—one of which specified 
that money could be given to a prisoner only through a guard.  During that visit, 
Chandler asked Riggs-Horton whether she could give him some cash to purchase 
items from the facility’s vending machines and stated that he was allowed to have 
up to $100 in $1 and $5 bills.  Riggs-Horton replied that she had only two $5 bills 
and a $1 bill, and Chandler instructed her to hand him the money under the table.  
January Term, 2019 
 
3
He explained that he would not receive the money for several days if it went through 
the proper channels.  Video surveillance showed Riggs-Horton passing something 
to Chandler under the table. 
{¶ 7} After the meeting, guards searched Chandler for contraband and 
discovered smokeless tobacco but did not find the cash that Riggs-Horton had given 
him.  Riggs-Horton was detained upon her return to the jail a few days later and 
was later charged with a violation of Ky.Rev.Stat.Ann. 520.060(1)(a), which 
provides, “A person is guilty of promoting contraband in the second degree when 
he knowingly introduces contraband into a detention facility or a penitentiary.” 
{¶ 8} Riggs-Horton denied passing Chandler smokeless tobacco but 
admitted that she had passed him contraband in the form of $11.  Through counsel, 
Riggs-Horton proposed that she be permitted to enter into a diversion program on 
conditions, including that she perform community service, offer a free divorce 
clinic to inmates at the jail, voluntarily suspend her criminal practice for three 
months, and make certain donations of cash and law books in lieu of pleading guilty 
to the charged offense.  The warden, however, insisted that she be prosecuted. 
{¶ 9} Riggs-Horton pleaded guilty to the charged offense and was 
sentenced to 180 days in jail, which was discharged for two years on conditions, 
including that she commit no other offenses, have no further contact with the 
Campbell County jail, and pay costs and fees of $165.  She self-reported her 
conviction to relator and to the Kentucky disciplinary authority.  Kentucky has held 
her disciplinary case in abeyance pending the resolution of this proceeding. 
{¶ 10} Riggs-Horton admitted that she committed the charged misconduct.  
The  board agreed that she 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) but recommended that we dismiss another alleged violation 
because the facts presented were insufficient to establish the misconduct by clear 
and convincing evidence.  We adopt the board’s finding that Riggs-Horton violated 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b) by passing contraband to Chandler while he was incarcerated 
in the Campbell County jail, and we dismiss the second violation alleged in relator’s 
complaint. 
Sanction 
{¶ 11} When imposing sanctions for attorney misconduct, we consider all 
relevant factors, including the ethical duties that the lawyer violated, the 
aggravating and mitigating factors listed in Gov.Bar R. V(13), and the sanctions 
imposed in similar cases. 
{¶ 12} Six mitigating factors are present: the absence of a prior disciplinary 
record, the absence of a dishonest or selfish motive, Riggs-Horton’s good-faith 
offer to make restitution as part of a diversion program, her full and free disclosure 
to the board and cooperative attitude toward the disciplinary proceedings, evidence 
of her good character and reputation in the community, and the imposition of 
criminal sanctions for her conduct.  See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(C)(1) through (6).  No 
aggravating factors are present.  See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(B). 
{¶ 13} The board recommends that Riggs-Horton be suspended from the 
practice of law for six months, all stayed on the condition that she engage in no 
further misconduct.  We have imposed that sanction for comparable violations of 
Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(b) in at least two cases involving misdemeanor convictions and 
similar mitigating factors.  For example, in Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Glaser, 146 
Ohio St.3d 102, 2016-Ohio-3052, 52 N.E.3d 1186, the attorney had been convicted 
of attempting to permit drug abuse on her premises.  Mitigating factors included no 
prior discipline, a cooperative attitude toward the disciplinary process, self-
reporting of misconduct, and several character references.  And in Disciplinary 
Counsel v. Grubb, 142 Ohio St.3d 521, 2015-Ohio-1349, 33 N.E.3d 40, the attorney 
had been convicted of complicity to commit worker’s compensation fraud for 
providing funds to a client while that client was receiving temporary-total-disability 
benefits.  Mitigating factors in that case included no prior discipline, cooperation 
January Term, 2019 
 
5
in the disciplinary process, payment of restitution, and evidence of the attorney’s 
good character and reputation. 
{¶ 14} After a review of the record, we agree that a stayed six-month 
suspension is the appropriate sanction for Riggs-Horton’s violation of Prof.Cond.R. 
8.4(b). 
{¶ 15} Accordingly, Virginia M. Riggs-Horton is suspended from the 
practice of law in Ohio for six months, all stayed on the condition that she engage 
in no further misconduct.  If she fails to comply with the condition of the stay, the 
stay will be lifted and she will serve the full six-month suspension.  Costs are taxed 
to Riggs-Horton. 
Judgment accordingly. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, 
and STEWART, JJ., concur. 
_________________ 
Beckman Weil Shepardson, L.L.C., and Kristen M. Myers; Jennifer K. 
Nordstrom; and Edwin W. Patterson III, Bar Counsel, for relator. 
Virginia M. Riggs-Horton, pro se. 
_________________