Davis, Application of, No. CF-74-1
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; C. WILLIAM O'NEILL |
| Citation | 38 Ohio St.2d 273,67 O.O.2d 344,313 N.E.2d 363 |
| Decision Date | 26 June 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. CF-74-1 |
| Parties | , 67 O.O.2d 344 Application of DAVIS. |
Page 273
Stanley K. Laughlin, Jr., Columbus, for applicant.
Dennis D. Grant, Richard C. Simpson and Theodore T. Twynham, Columbus, for the Columbus Bar Ass'n.
PER CURIAM.
On May 2, 1973, Frederick E. Davis, Jr., filed applications for registration as a candidate[313 N.E.2d 364] for admission to the practice of law and for permission to take the bar examination. In response to question 12(a) of the application for registration as a candidate for admission, Davis stated:
'September, 1969-I was charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a felony. The Franklin County grand jury returned an indictment of (1) breaking and entering an inhabited dwelling in the night season; and, (2) grand larceny. In September of 1970, I entered a plea of guilty to grand larceny, and the burglary charge was dropped. In January, 1971, I was given a sentence of five years probation conditioned on my dropping out of law school, which I did. In February, 1972 I was released from probation.'
Pursuant to Section 3(B) of Gov.R.I., the applications were referred to the Committee on Applicants for Admission
Page 274
to the Practice of Law of the Columbus Bar Association. Upon consideration of the application, a personal interview of Davis and certain independent investigation, the committee recommended to this court that the application be disapproved 'for the reason that the applicant's file reveals that said applicant plead guilty to a felony.'Upon receipt of the notice of the adverse recommendation of the admissions committee, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 9(D), Gov.R.I., Davis requested a hearing before the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness. The hearing was held on October 5, 1973, before a three-member panel of that board. The board's report was filed with this court on January 15, 1974. The report concluded that Davis was not qualified for admission to the practice of law and recommended that the court disapprove his application.
To be admitted to the bar of this state, an applicant must possess certain required educational qualifications and must demonstrate a proficiency in the law. Equally important, he must also establish his fitness and prove that he has the good moral character which an attorney at law must possess in order to faithfully fulfill the position of trust in which he is placed by his clients, by this court and by society. Section 9(H),...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v. State Bar Examining Committee, No. 14210
...Haukebo, 352 N.W.2d 752, 754 (Minn.1984); Application of Jenkins, 94 N.J. 458, 471, 467 A.2d 1084 (1983); In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 276, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974). Fitness to practice law does not remain fixed in time. While the BEC found the petitioner unfit to practice la......
-
Prager, Matter of
...S.J.C. No. 81764 (December 22, 1983). See also In re Cason, 249 Ga. 806, 807-808, 294 S.E.2d 520 (1982); In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 275, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974) (Davis I ); Matter of Jaffee, 311 Or. 159, 163, 806 P.2d 685 (1991), S.C., 319 Or. 172, 874 P.2d 1299 (1994); C.......
-
State v. Bill Adam Sanders, 96-LW-4745
...State v Williams (1978), 55 Ohio St.2d 82, 377 N.E.2d 1013, paragraph one of the syllabus; Athens v. Wolf (1974), 38 Ohio St.2d 237, 313 N.E.2d 363. Generally, the plain view exception to the warrant requirement can apply to seizures made by a police officer who sees contraband inside a veh......
-
In re Manville, No. 84-1362.
...law. Konigsberg v. State Bar, 366 U.S. 36, 41-42, 81 S.Ct. 997, 1001-1002, 6 L.Ed.2d 105 (1961). See, e.g., In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974) (per curiam) (bar admissions committee conducted independent investigation of applicant who previously had been co......
-
Scott v. State Bar Examining Committee, No. 14210
...Haukebo, 352 N.W.2d 752, 754 (Minn.1984); Application of Jenkins, 94 N.J. 458, 471, 467 A.2d 1084 (1983); In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 276, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974). Fitness to practice law does not remain fixed in time. While the BEC found the petitioner unfit to practice la......
-
Prager, Matter of
...S.J.C. No. 81764 (December 22, 1983). See also In re Cason, 249 Ga. 806, 807-808, 294 S.E.2d 520 (1982); In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 275, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974) (Davis I ); Matter of Jaffee, 311 Or. 159, 163, 806 P.2d 685 (1991), S.C., 319 Or. 172, 874 P.2d 1299 (1994); C.......
-
State v. Bill Adam Sanders, 96-LW-4745
...State v Williams (1978), 55 Ohio St.2d 82, 377 N.E.2d 1013, paragraph one of the syllabus; Athens v. Wolf (1974), 38 Ohio St.2d 237, 313 N.E.2d 363. Generally, the plain view exception to the warrant requirement can apply to seizures made by a police officer who sees contraband inside a veh......
-
In re Manville, No. 84-1362.
...law. Konigsberg v. State Bar, 366 U.S. 36, 41-42, 81 S.Ct. 997, 1001-1002, 6 L.Ed.2d 105 (1961). See, e.g., In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St.2d 273, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974) (per curiam) (bar admissions committee conducted independent investigation of applicant who previously had been co......