O'Connell, Matter of, 79S00-9512-DI-1331

Decision Date20 November 1997
Docket NumberNo. 79S00-9512-DI-1331,79S00-9512-DI-1331
PartiesIn the Matter of Lawrence B. O'CONNELL.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

PER CURIAM.

The respondent, Lawrence B. O'Connell, and the Disciplinary Commission have tendered to this Court stipulated facts in which they state that the respondent engaged in certain actions which the Commission alleges violate the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys at Law. As the final arbiter of attorney misconduct and sanction, this matter is now before us for final resolution. In re Huebner, 561 N.E.2d 492 (Ind.1990).

The respondent was admitted to the bar of this state in 1975 and is subject to the disciplinary jurisdiction of this Court. In December 1995, the Commission filed a one-count Verified Complaint for Disciplinary Action, therein alleging that the respondent violated Ind. Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(c) by failing to file personal tax returns for calendar years 1989 and 1990. 1 By their stipulations the parties now agree that on April 12, 1995, the respondent was charged in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana in a two-count information with failing to file U.S. individual income tax returns for the years 1989 and 1990, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. Contemporaneously with the filing of the charges, the respondent and the U.S. attorney filed a petition to enter a plea of guilty, wherein the respondent admitted that he had voluntarily and intentionally failed to file individual income tax returns for 1989 and 1990. On August 4, 1995, the district court entered a judgment of conviction against the respondent on each of the counts. He was subsequently placed on probation for a period of two years, ordered to perform community service, and placed on home detention for four months. The parties also agree that during 1989 and 1990, while serving as the Tippecanoe County attorney, the respondent earned more than $250,000 for services he rendered for the county.

We find that by knowingly failing to file his individual tax returns for 1989 and 1990, the respondent engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation in violation of Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c).

We must now determine an appropriate sanction for the respondent's misconduct. Where a lawyer fails to file a personal income tax return, without significant aggravating factors attendant thereto, this Court has imposed a short suspension from the practice of law. Thus, for example, where a lawyer was found guilty of failing to file income tax returns for two successive years, this Court accepted a Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline imposing a thirty day suspension from the practice of law. In re Schnaitter, 407 N.E.2d 1153 (Ind.1980). See also In re Gay, 413 N.E.2d 879 (Ind.1980) (thirty day suspension for failure to file income tax returns for 1972 and 1973); In re Hirschauer, 441 N.E.2d 480 (Ind.1982) (thirty days for multiple years of failing to file returns). However, where there are aggravating factors, this Court has imposed more stringent sanctions. See, e.g., In re Transki, 620 N.E.2d 16 (Ind.1993) (90 day suspension for felony failure to file federal tax return).

The respondent has submitted a lengthy statement in mitigation. In it, he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Byrd v. The Mississippi Bar
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • July 25, 2002
    ...law. A conviction for tax evasion is not a necessary predicate to support a finding of dishonesty. Id. at 1091. See also In re O'Connell, 687 N.E.2d 573 (Ind.1997) (holding that failure to file a state return was a serious crime that reflected adversely upon an attorney's honesty, trustwort......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT