Opinion ID: 1188922
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: fifth cause of complaint

Text: The trial panel found that the accused also violated DR 1-102(A)(2) (committing a criminal act that reflects adversely upon the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness to practice law) (set forth supra ) because he committed the crimes of solicitation, ORS 161.435, [8] and false swearing, ORS 162.075. [9] ORS 161.155 [10] makes a person criminally liable for the acts of another person if he or she solicits or commands the other person to commit the crime. The Bar argues that the accused directed his staff members to commit the crime of false swearing and that, therefore, the accused committed the crimes of false swearing and solicitation. The accused argues that his employees and, therefore, that he, did not commit the crime of false swearing because they did not make any sworn statements. ORS 162.055(4) defines sworn statement to mean any statement knowingly given under any form of oath or affirmation attesting to the truth of what is stated. Although the accused's employees may not have raised their hands in a formal oath, they signed a statement on the wills that said: we hereby certify that we believe the Testatrix[or] to be of sound mind and memory and under no undue influence. Just below the signatures of the witnesses on the wills, the following jurat appeared: Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me by [name of testatrix or testator], Testatrix[or], and subscribed and sworn to before me by [names of witnesses], witnesses, this [date]. [11] The accused's employees signed wills that certified the truth of the statement and were notarized by the accused or some other notary. The witnesses' statement said that they certified that the testator was of sound mind and memory and under no undue influence. Moreover, the jurat and notary seal and signature were intended to ensure that the witnesses (and testator) signed the will in good faith. The purpose of those precautions is to attest to the truth of the information that is stated in the will and in the witness statement. That is an oath or affirmation for the purposes of ORS 162.055(4) and 162.075(1). See State v. Carr, 319 Or. 408, ___, 877 P.2d 1192 (1994) (slip op at 5) (for the purposes of the perjury statute, a statement was sworn when the statement was a vow of the person making the statement and    the vow was made in the presence of the notary). On nearly 300 documents, the accused's employees made an oath or affirmation that attested to the truth of a document that stated that the testator had signed in their presence. The employees were not present when the clients signed the documents. Therefore, the accused's employees committed the crime of false swearing. The accused admits that his staff members' attestations were made at his behest. Accordingly, we find by clear and convincing evidence that the accused violated DR 1-102(A)(2) when he committed the crime of solicitation, ORS 161.435, and false swearing, ORS 162.075(1), through operation of ORS 161.155.