Opinion ID: 6309848
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: concise statement of case

Text: In the course of receiving a citation for a traffic violation on a state highway, respondent made a derogatory remark to the state pobce officer, refused to restrict his movements as ordered by the officer while the latter was preparing the citation, and pushed the left front door of the state pobce car against the officer’s left leg as he attempted to emerge from the driver’s seat, causing pain and producing red marks on the leg. Respondent had reason to think that several members of the state pobce had a grudge against him because of certain conduct in court, but [B], the pobce officer involved here, did not know [respondent] or that he was a lawyer until afterward. The defense of self-defense was not accepted by Judge [C] of the Court of Common Pleas of [ ] County who tried the case without a jury. He found [respondent] guilty and sentenced him to a fine of $200 and costs. The Superior Court affirmed the conviction on appeal by [respondent] and the Supreme Court refused aUocatur. The violations of the disciplinary rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility alleged here axe: (1) D.R. 1-102(A)(5) — Engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. (2) D.R. 1-102(A)(6) — Engaging in conduct that adversely reflects upon fitness to practice law.