Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Cohen

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Disciplinary Counsel v. Cohen, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2020.] 
 
 
 
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-2020 
DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. COHEN. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Disciplinary Counsel v. Cohen, Slip Opinion  
No. 2015-Ohio-2020.] 
Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, 
including committing an illegal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s 
honesty or trustworthiness—Indefinite suspension. 
(No. 2014-1740—Submitted January 14, 2015—Decided May 28, 2015.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 2014-032. 
_______________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Respondent, Gregory Alan Cohen of Cincinnati, Ohio, Attorney 
Registration No. 0061854, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1993.  
On February 12, 2014, we suspended his license on an interim basis after 
receiving notice of his felony convictions for attempted obstruction of justice and 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
attempted tampering with evidence.  In re Cohen, 138 Ohio St.3d 1233, 2014-
Ohio-474, 5 N.E.3d 654.  On March 25, 2014, relator, disciplinary counsel, 
charged Cohen with violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct based on the 
same facts that led to his felony convictions.  The parties waived a formal hearing 
and instead submitted stipulations of facts and rule violations, and they 
recommended that as a sanction, Cohen serve an indefinite suspension with credit 
for time served under his interim felony suspension.  The Board of 
Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline1 issued a report accepting the 
parties’ stipulations and recommending that we impose the parties’ proposed 
sanction. 
{¶ 2} After reviewing the record, we adopt the board’s findings of fact and 
misconduct and agree that an indefinite suspension is the appropriate sanction in 
this case.  However, we decline to grant credit for time served under the interim 
felony suspension. 
Misconduct 
{¶ 3} In early 2013, while Cohen was representing a defendant charged 
with murder, he talked to a prosecution witness about purchasing bus fare to 
travel out of state and then paid money to the witness.  The witness then contacted 
police, who later captured Cohen discussing the proposal on tape.  In February 
2013, a grand jury indicted Cohen on charges of bribery and obstruction of 
justice, and in January 2014, the grand jury indicted him on an additional charge 
of attempted tampering with evidence.  He later pled guilty to the attempted-
tampering charge and a reduced charge of attempted obstruction of justice, both 
fourth-degree felonies.  The prosecutor dismissed the bribery charge.  On January 
29, 2014, a judge of the Hamilton County common pleas court ordered that Cohen 
                                                 
1 Effective January 1, 2015, the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline has been 
renamed the Board of Professional Conduct.  See Gov.Bar R. V(1)(A), 140 Ohio St.3d CII. 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
serve monitored house arrest for 60 days and three years’ community control, pay 
a $5,000 fine, and perform 500 hours of community service. 
{¶ 4} Based on this conduct, the parties stipulated and the board found that 
Cohen 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), 
8.4(c) (prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, 
fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and 8.4(d) (prohibiting a lawyer from 
engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice).  We agree 
with these findings of misconduct. 
Sanction 
{¶ 5} When imposing sanctions for attorney misconduct, we consider 
several 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 BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B).2  Disciplinary Counsel v. Broeren, 115 Ohio 
St.3d 473, 2007-Ohio-5251, 875 N.E.2d 935, ¶ 21.  However, because each 
disciplinary case is unique, we are not limited to the factors specified in BCGD 
Proc.Reg. 10(B) and may take into account all relevant factors in determining 
which sanction to impose. 
Mitigating and aggravating factors 
{¶ 6} The board found, and we agree, that the following mitigating factors 
are present:  Cohen has no prior discipline, he made full and free disclosure to the 
disciplinary board and had a cooperative attitude toward the proceedings, the 
record includes evidence of good character and reputation, and other penalties 
have been imposed for the underlying misconduct.  See BCGD Proc.Reg. 
                                                 
2 Effective January 1, 2015, the aggravating and mitigating factors previously set forth in BCGD 
Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1) and (2) are codified in Gov.Bar R. V(13), 140 Ohio St.3d CXXIV. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
10(B)(2)(a), (d), (e), and (f).  The board determined, and we agree, that none of 
the aggravating factors listed in the former board regulations are applicable here. 
Applicable precedent 
{¶ 7} The board recommends that we indefinitely suspend Cohen and 
grant him credit for time served under his interim felony suspension, which was 
imposed on February 12, 2014.  The board recognizes that Cohen’s conduct—
attempting to obstruct justice and tamper with evidence by paying money to a 
prosecution witness—undermined the integrity of the judicial system, but the 
board also notes that his convictions arose “out of an isolated incident in his 
career.”  To support its recommended sanction, the board cites Ohio State Bar 
Assn. v. McCafferty, 140 Ohio St.3d 229, 2014-Ohio-3075, 17 N.E.3d 521, in 
which we indefinitely suspended a former judge after she was convicted of 
making false statements to federal authorities. 
{¶ 8} Few infractions impugn the integrity of the legal profession more 
than an attorney’s criminal acts interfering with the fair administration of justice.  
Accordingly, we have previously reserved our most severe sanctions for attorneys 
who commit crimes such as obstruction of justice or tampering with evidence 
while representing a client.  See, e.g., Disciplinary Counsel v. Phillips, 108 Ohio 
St.3d 331, 2006-Ohio-1064, 843 N.E.2d 775 (a former prosecutor was 
permanently disbarred after being convicted of bribery, attempted obstruction of 
justice, attempted tampering, and other crimes for accepting a bribe from a 
criminal defendant and telling another defendant—who was an undercover 
informant—that the payment of money could affect the outcome of a pending 
case); Disciplinary Counsel v. Freedman, 49 Ohio St.3d 65, 551 N.E.2d 143 
(1990) (an attorney was permanently disbarred after being convicted of 
obstruction of justice for obtaining and keeping a client’s contraband to prevent 
discovery by federal authorities); Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Jurek, 62 Ohio St.3d 
318, 581 N.E.2d 1356 (1991) (an attorney was permanently disbarred after being 
January Term, 2015 
 
5
convicted of obstruction of justice for bribing a court’s bond commissioner who 
was in charge of assigning judges); Disciplinary Counsel v. Young, 102 Ohio 
St.3d 113, 2004-Ohio-1809, 807 N.E.2d 317 (an attorney was indefinitely 
suspended after being convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice for plotting with 
his client to pay money to a witness in exchange for fabricating a story that would 
exonerate the client); Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen, 94 Ohio St.3d 129, 760 
N.E.2d 820 (2002) (an attorney was indefinitely suspended after being convicted 
of perjury and tampering with records for knowingly creating and having her 
client sign a false affidavit and then having her client file a complaint based on 
the false affidavit). 
{¶ 9} Cohen similarly attempted to thwart the administration of justice, 
and the seriousness of his misconduct cannot be overstated.  Nonetheless, we 
agree with the board that an indefinite suspension is the appropriate sanction in 
this case, especially given the presence of several mitigating factors and the 
absence of any aggravating factors.  However, we find no compelling reason to 
grant Cohen credit for time served under his interim felony suspension. 
Conclusion 
{¶ 10} Having considered the ethical duties violated, the mitigating 
factors, and the sanctions imposed in comparable cases, we hereby indefinitely 
suspend Gregory Alan Cohen from the practice of law, with no credit for time 
served under his interim suspension.  Costs are taxed to Cohen. 
Judgment accordingly. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, and FRENCH, JJ., 
concur. 
 
LANZINGER and O’NEILL, JJ., would grant the respondent credit for time 
served under interim suspension. 
_________________________ 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
6
Scott J. Drexel, Disciplinary Counsel, and Stacy Solochek Beckman, 
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator. 
Peter Rosenwald, for respondent. 
_________________________