Court Opinion

ID: 9566708
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:42:11.8722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:08.625968
License: Public Domain

SIMMS, Justice,
dissenting:
I must respectfully dissent. Conceding the four year suspension may be viewed by some as substantial punishment for Respondent’s transgressions, I sincerely believe disbarment is warranted under the facts of this case.
Respondent’s act of soliciting a large sum of money from a client with the representation that the path of justice can somehow be altered by making substantial “campaign contributions” to public officials, who incidentally were lawyers, is reprehensible, as well as illegal.
*282The actions of Respondent undermine the public perception of the very foundation of our legal system; that justice is not for sale but is given to all, equally.
As this Court observed in State, ex rel., Bar Assn. v. Raskin, Okl., 642 P.2d 262 (1982):
“ * * * Whatever the reason for his misconduct, our concern is and must be for the protection of the public, the preservation of its confidence in the legal profession and for the maintenance of the professional standards for lawyers. Our own integrity as the lawyers’ licensing authority is also at stake here.”
OPALA, J., joins in that part of the dissent which discusses the gravity of the respondent’s offense.