Case Name: In the Matter of Janine L. SUTTON, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 2011-03-18
Citations: 943 N.E.2d 807
Docket Number: No. 48S00-1009-DI-494
Parties: In the Matter of Janine L. SUTTON, Respondent.
Judges: All Justices concur.
Reporter: North Eastern Reporter 2d
Volume: 943
Pages: 807–808

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Janine L. SUTTON, Respondent.
No. 48S00-1009-DI-494.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
March 18, 2011.

Opinion:
PUBLISHED ORDER APPROVING STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT FOR DISCIPLINE
Pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23(11), the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and Re spondent have submitted for approval a "Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline" stipulating agreed facts and proposed discipline as summarized below:
Stipulated Facts: In May 2009, while employed by the Madison County prosecutor's office, Respondent was charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated. She completed a deferral program, and the case was dismissed. Respondent has resigned from her position with the prosecutor's office and has voluntarily participated and successfully completed services from the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program.
A fact in aggravation is that Respondent was employed as a deputy prosecutor at the time of her misconduct. The parties cite the following facts in mitigation: (1) Respondent has no disciplinary history; and (2) Respondent was cooperative with the Commission.
Violation: The parties agree that Respondent violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(d), which prohibits engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
Discipline: The parties propose the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand. The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, now approves the agreed discipline and imposes a public reprimand for Respondent's misconduct.
The costs of this proceeding are assessed against Respondent. With the acceptance of this agreement, the hearing officer appointed in this case is discharged.
The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Order to the hearing officer, to the parties or their respective attorneys, and to all other entities entitled to notice under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(3)(d). The Clerk is further directed to post this order to the Court's website, and Thomson Reuters is directed to publish a copy of this order in the bound volumes of this Court's decisions.
All Justices concur.