Title: Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Blake

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Blake, 100 Ohio St.3d 298, 2003-Ohio-5755.] 
 
 
CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. BLAKE. 
[Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Blake, 100 Ohio St.3d 298, 2003-Ohio-5755.] 
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Permanent disbarment — Felony and 
misdemeanor convictions — Failing to cooperate in disciplinary 
investigation. 
(No. 2003-1074 — Submitted August 26, 2003 — Decided November 12, 2003.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 02-51. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶1} 
Respondent, Wilton E. Blake II of Cincinnati, Ohio, Attorney 
Registration No. 0061255, was admitted to the Ohio bar in 1993.  On September 
27, 2002, we suspended respondent’s license to practice law for an interim period 
pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(4) upon receiving notice that he had been 
convicted of four felonies.  In re Blake, 96 Ohio St.3d 1519, 2002-Ohio-5089, 775 
N.E.2d 860. 
{¶2} 
On August 12, 2002, relator, Cincinnati Bar Association, charged 
respondent with professional misconduct based on the felony convictions and two 
subsequent misdemeanor convictions.  Respondent was served with the complaint 
but did not answer, and relator moved for default pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(F).  
A master commissioner appointed by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances 
and Discipline considered the motion, making findings of fact, conclusions of 
law, and a recommendation. 
{¶3} 
On May 23, 2002, respondent pled guilty to and was convicted of 
one count of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), a fourth-degree felony; two 
more counts of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), each a fifth-degree 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
felony; and one count of forgery in violation of R.C. 2913.31(A)(2), a fifth-degree 
felony.  The court sentenced respondent to five years of community control and 
ordered him to make restitution to his victims in the amount of $25,297.54 and to 
perform 500 hours of community service. 
{¶4} 
On May 17, 2002, respondent additionally pled no contest to theft 
in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), a first-degree misdemeanor, and criminal 
trespass in violation of R.C. 2911.21(A)(2), a fourth-degree misdemeanor. 
{¶5} 
The master commissioner found that respondent’s criminal activity 
violated DR 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude), 
1-102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or 
misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the 
administration of justice), and 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct that adversely 
reflects on an attorney’s fitness to practice law).  Because respondent met once 
with relator’s investigator but failed to respond to the investigator’s letters of 
inquiry, the master commissioner also found respondent in violation of Gov.Bar 
R. V(4)(G). 
{¶6} 
In recommending a sanction for this misconduct, the master 
commissioner considered in mitigation and aggravation several documented 
allegations that we cannot consider on relator’s motion for default because they 
are neither sworn nor certified.  See Gov.Bar R. V(6)(F)(1)(b).  However, the 
master commissioner also observed that no evidence substantiates respondent’s 
compliance with the order of restitution.  See Section 10(B)(1)(i) of the Rules and 
Regulations Governing Procedure on Complaints and Hearings Before the Board 
of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.  As relator suggested, the master 
commissioner recommended disbarment.  The board adopted the master 
commissioner’s findings of misconduct and recommendation. 
{¶7} 
We agree that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(3), 1-102(A)(4), 
1-102(A)(5), and 1-102(A)(6), and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G).  We also agree that 
January Term, 2003 
3 
respondent should be disbarred for his criminal conduct.  Disbarment is warranted 
when an attorney turns to crime and is convicted of theft offenses.  Cincinnati Bar 
Assn. v. Banks (2002), 94 Ohio St.3d 428, 763 N.E.2d 1166 (attorney convicted of 
interstate transportation of stolen laptop computers disbarred for violations of DR 
1-102[A][3], [4], and[5]). 
{¶8} 
Accordingly, respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the 
practice of law in Ohio.  Costs are taxed to respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR and O’DONNELL, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Christopher R. Heekin, for relator. 
__________________