Opinion ID: 2069869
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: 3-4 The Age And Maturity Of The Applicant When The Offenses Were Committed And The Social And Historical Context In Which The Offenses Were Committed.

Text: The Applicant was in his mid-40's at the time of his misconduct. He had been a trial judge for seven years and a practicing attorney in his own firm for three years. We conclude that while the Applicant was of sufficient age and maturity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct, he was going through a difficult time in his marriage and in accepting and acknowledging his sexual orientation. The Applicant has received professional counseling and treatment in connection with the stresses in his personal life. As noted by Dr. John C. Ehrmann, the clinical psychologist appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Committee to examine the Applicant, the Applicant has taken the necessary steps to result in attitude change and self-acceptance. (R. at 639). The underlying dynamics that had contributed to the Applicant's earlier difficulties had long since been faced and dealt with. Id. Other experts, described above, concurred in Dr. Ehrmann's conclusion. See also (R. at 940-941).