 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Oklahoma Bar Association v. Wyatt9/11/2001
of family funds while in law school); State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Hobbs, 1993 OK 7, 848 P.2d 551 (bank fraud, embezzlement, and money laundering); and State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Crabtree, 1995 OK 123, 907 P.2d 1045 (bankruptcy fraud, abetting bankruptcy fraud, and money laundering).
The Bar relies on State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Seeyle, 1971 OK 133, 490 P.2d 1095, in which the respondent was disbarred following conviction of the intentional criminal act of assault and battery. The Bar argues that Wyatt's conduct was similarly violent but Wyatt resists this comparison. Wyatt argues that because Wyatt did not intend to harm anyone when he chose to drive while he was impaired, Seeyle does not apply. While Wyatt has a point, this distinction does not convince us that any discipline less than disbarrment would be appropriate here.
It is undisputed that (1) Wyatt was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree because (2) his drunk driving lead to an accident that took the life of another and (3) he was sentenced to twenty years in the penitentiary. We hold that these undisputed facts lead to the inescapable conclusion that Wyatt must be disbarred from the practice of law. The record made before the trial panel demonstrates that Wyatt is remorseful and is doing everything he can to straighten our his drinking problem and his life. Nevertheless, a man is dead because of Wyatt's irrresponsibility. Wyatt's rehabilitation may appropriately be considered if he applies for reinstatement after he has paid his debt to society but not now.
We have, on occasion, chosen discipline less severe than disbarrment in cases where the issue of discipline arose from a felony conviction. See, for example, State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Dennison, 1995 OK 33, 872 P.2d 403 (conviction for making false statements to financial institution lead to suspension) and State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Livshee, 1994 OK 12, 870 P.2d 770 (conviction for failure to file tax return lead to suspension for four months). But the conduct that lead to the respondents' convictions in Dennison and Livshee did not cause the catastrophic consequences that Wyatt's misconduct caused: the taking of an innocent life.
We are obliged in Bar discipline matters to take such actions as will preserve the confidence and trust of the public in the legal profession. "Mitigating factors will rarely override the requirement of disbarrment." 1982 OK 39 , 642 P.2d 262, 268. The consequences of Wyatt's irresponsibility were disastrous; this, coupled with the fact that he had a prior drunk driving conviction leave us with no alternative but to order his disbarrment. We would be remiss in our duty to preserve public trust and confidence in the legal profession if we imposed any discipline less that disbarrment here.
We hold that the appropriate discipline for Wyatt's conviction is disbarrment. It is the order of the Court that Wyatt's disbarrment is to be effective from the date of his suspension from the practice of law, January 16, 2001. Wyatt is further ordered to pay the costs of the proceeding in the amount of $429.15.
RESPONDENT DISBARRED AND ORDERED TO PAY COSTS OF THE PROCEEDING
ALL JUSTICES CONCUR.
Page 1 2 Oklahoma DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|