Court Opinion

ID: 9892047
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-20 13:08:20.239643+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:21:51.712558
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2023-Ohio-3802.]

                          DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. SMITH.
 [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2023-Ohio-3802.]
         (No. 2021-0448—October 18, 2023—Decided October 20, 2023.)
                        ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT.
                                ____________________
        {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an
application for reinstatement by respondent, Samuel Ray Smith II, Attorney
Registration No. 0076242, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio.
        {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of March 23, 2022,
wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(12)(A)(3), suspended respondent from
the practice of law for a period of two years, with the final six months stayed on
conditions, finds that respondent has complied with that order and with the
provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(24).
        {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to
the practice of law in the state of Ohio. It is further ordered that, consistent with
the opinion rendered herein on March 23, 2022, respondent shall be required to
work with a monitoring attorney designated by relator for a period of one year.
        {¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies
of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(1) and that publication be
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(2).
        {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, 168 Ohio St.3d
196, 2022-Ohio-840, 197 N.E.3d 533.
        KENNEDY, C.J., and FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART, BRUNNER,
and DETERS, JJ., concur.
                                  _________________