Cochrane, Matter of, 8229
| Decision Date | 29 April 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 8229,8229 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Thomas H. COCHRANE, attorney at law. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
James P. Logan, Reno, Maurice J. Sullivan, Executive Sec'ty, State Bar of Nevada Reno, Peter D. Laxalt, Sp. Prosecutor, Carson City, Steve Morris, Sp. Prosecutor, Las Vegas, for State Bar.
George E. Graziadei, Robert E. Rose, Las Vegas, for respondent.
Thomas H. Cochrane, convicted of willful failure to file an income tax return for the calendar year 1971 (26 U.S.C. § 7203), has petitioned this court to review the recommendation of the Board of Governors of the Nevada State Bar favoring the imposition of a six month suspension from the practice of law, based on the premise that the petitioner's conviction involved moral turpitude.
Initially, we consider the question of whether moral turpitude exists solely by virtue of the petitioner's conviction. In re Fahey, 8 Cal.3d 842, 849, 106 Cal.Rptr. 313, 317, 505 P.2d 1369, 1373 (1973). No intent to defraud need be established to sustain a conviction for violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826, 96 S.Ct. 43, 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975); United States v. Klee, 494 F.2d 394 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 835, 95 S.Ct. 62, 42 L.Ed.2d 61 (1974).
'Thus respondent is subject to discipline only if his moral turpitude is established by special circumstances that are not necessarily present whenever the offense is committed.' In re Fahey, supra, 106 Cal.Rptr. at 317, 505 P.2d at 1373. Our de novo review of the facts reveals that: (1) Cochrane signed and filed informational partnership tax returns for each year in which he did not file individual returns; (2) Cochrane intended, at all times, to pay the obligations in full when he obtained sufficient funds; and (3) Cochrane's financial problems, resulting in an inability to pay his taxes, stemmed from both marital difficulties and a disabling injury to his partner. Both misfortunes existed during part, if not all, of the time periods in question.
The Board of Governors points to the fact that the Internal Revenue Service had to contact Cochrane before any attempts to arrange payment were made. However, it appears from the record that Cochrane's financial and marital reverses were not at an end when contact was made and he was still without funds to satisfy his obligations to the federal government. Cochrane appears to have been totally candid with both the Internal Revenue Service and the State Bar in their investigations. The facts of this case do not sufficiently support a finding that Cochrane had an intent to defraud, or was intentionally dishonest for the purpose of personal gain, and accordingly, we do not deem petitioner's conviction to be one involving moral turpitude.
Although not finding moral turpitude, this court in no manner countenances Cochrane's actions. Unlike the California Supreme Court in In re Fahey, supra, we...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Walman
...106 Cal.Rptr. 313, 505 P.2d 1369, 1374-75 (1973); Kentucky State Bar Association v. McAfee, 301 S.W.2d 899 (Ky.1957); Matter of Cochrane, 549 P.2d 328, 329 (Nev.1976); In re Ford's Case, 102 N.H. 24, 149 A.2d 863, 864 (1959); Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Leroux, 16 Ohio St.2d 10, 242 N.E.2d 347,......
-
State Bar of Nevada v. Claiborne
...must be considered in a disciplinary proceeding. See Sloan v. State Bar, 102 Nev. 436, 440, 726 P.2d 330, 333 (1986); In re Cochrane, 92 Nev. 253, 549 P.2d 328 (1976). Furthermore, as previously observed, the Board's February 13, 1987, response to our order of January 26 of the same year re......
-
Nicholson, Matter of
...evade); Re Corcoran, 215 Or. 660, 337 P.2d 307 (1959) (absence evil/fraudulent intent, may or may not be based on facts); Re Cochrane, 92 Nev. 253, 549 P.2d 328 (1976) (no personal return filed but partnership returns filed); Re Weisensee, S.D., 224 N.W.2d 830 (1975) (involved only one year......
-
Rohan, In re
...... (26 U.S.C. § 7203.) We referred the matter to the State Bar for hearing and report as to whether the facts and circumstances surrounding ...Roggensack (1963) 19 Wis.2d 38, 119 N.W.2d 412, 416; see also In re Cochrane (Nev.1976) 549 P.2d 328, 329.). [21 Cal.3d 204] We conclude that even in the ......