[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 RiggsHorton’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, selfreporting 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. 

_________________