Court Opinion

ID: 9850886
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:03:59.238315+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:45.024244
License: Public Domain

KONENKAMP, Justice
(concurring).
I concur with the majority opinion because a suspension accomplishes everything necessary to protect the public and maintain the integrity of the legal profession. If Olson continues his marijuana use and fails to strictly follow the conditions for reinstatement he will never regain his license to practice.
Olson was diagnosed as chemically dependent. He refuses to accept this, which would not surprise those who understand addictions. He also views his use of marijuana as a constitutional right for which cause he sees himself as an advocate, perhaps even a martyr. Nonetheless, people, including lawyers, are a valuable resource and should be given the opportunity to redeem themselves. *375Countless persons have changed their lives by returning to sobriety through abstinence along with treatment, Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, prayer or other means.
Denial is part of addiction, but acceptance is the first step to change. Suspension allows a chemically dependent lawyer time to reassess and reform, with an opportunity for eventual reinstatement. Certainly, Olson’s marijuana use deserves condemnation and he has been dealt with accordingly: he spent a month in jail following his criminal conviction and now we are suspending his license. Olson’s suspension is equivalent to a disbarment unless he reforms: he can choose abstinence and treatment, which may lead to reinstatement, or he can continue his ruinous pursuit of marijuana, but not both.
MILLER, C.J., joins this writing and I am authorized to so state.