358 N.E.2d 534
D.D. No. 76-11Supreme Court of Ohio.
Decided December 15, 1976.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Gov. R. V(8)(a) — Permanent disbarment imposed.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
Respondent, Edward M. Esber, has been a member of the Bar of Ohio since 1958, and has practiced law primarily in Cleveland.
On March 28, 1975, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, respondent was convicted of passing, uttering, and publishing as true and genuine a number of counterfeit United States Treasury Bills, and of conspiracy to pass, utter, and publish as true the counterfeit bills, all in violation of Sections 2, 371 and 472 of Title 18, United States Code. His conviction was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on November 6, 1975.
Relator, the Bar Association of Greater Cleveland, then instituted this proceeding before the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, and submitted a certified copy of respondent’s conviction to the hearing panel of the board.
The certified copy of respondent’s conviction indicated that he had knowingly and unlawfully conspired to pass, utter and publish as true and genuine ten United States Treasury Bills in the denomination of $100,000 each; that he had been sentenced for a period of two years and six months on each of three counts of the indictment, said terms to run concurrently; and that he had been ordered to be confined to an institution designated by the Attorney General for the first six months, with the balance of the prison term suspended, and that he had been ordered
Page 232
to be placed on probation for three years.
The board found that respondent’s conviction, evidenced from the certified copy of the court’s record, was sufficient basis for disciplinary action in this state.
The board concluded that respondent violated Canon 1, DR 1-102(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility, as adopted under Gov. R. IV(1), and was thereby guilty of misconduct as defined in Gov. R. V(5)(a).
Mr. Michael Honohan and Mr. Edward Cass, for relator.
Mr. Edward M. Esber, pro se.
Per Curiam.
Even if we were persuaded by respondent’s testimony before the panel of the board of commissioners, Gov. R. V(8)(b) states that “[a] certified copy of a judgment entry of conviction of an offense shall be conclusive evidence of the commission of that offense in any disciplinary proceeding instituted against an attorney based upon the conviction.”
The Code of Professional Responsibility has been adopted by this court under Gov. R. IV(1). We find that respondent violated Canon 1, DR 1-102(A)(3), which states that a lawyer shall not engage in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude.
Gov. R. V(5)(a) defines misconduct as the commission or conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. Gov. R. V(6)(a) requires each attorney found guilty of misconduct to be disciplined. By his conviction and subsequent incarceration, respondent has lessened public confidence in the legal profession and has reflected substantial discredit upon his fellow lawyers.
We conclude that respondent must be permanently disbarred from the practice of law.
Judgment accordingly.
O’NEILL, C.J., HERBERT, CORRIGAN, STERN, CELEBREZZE, W. BROWN and P. BROWN, JJ., concur.
Page 233