Opinion
No. 90-805
Submitted June 19, 1990 —
Decided November 7, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One-year suspension — Conviction for attempting to evade federal income tax.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 89-57.
In a complaint filed October 24, 1989, relator, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, charged that respondent, Bernard Eugene Reisman, had violated, inter alia, DR 1-102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation). In his answer, respondent admitted the factual allegations in the complaint, but denied any misconduct. Thereafter, the parties waived a hearing, and the matter was considered on submitted stipulations by a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court.
The parties stipulated that, on January 13, 1989, respondent pled guilty to and was convicted of violating Section 7201, Title 26, U.S. Code (attempting to evade federal income tax), a felony. Respondent was placed on probation for a period of three years and was fined $15,000. On August 2, 1989, respondent was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V(9)(a) (iii).
Respondent was convicted of this offense because he understated his and his wife's income on their 1982 federal income tax return. Respondent declared their joint taxable income to be $108,034, the tax upon which was $41,088. However, respondent and his wife had actually earned $245,431, upon which they should have paid $109,786 in federal income tax.
Based on the foregoing, the panel found that respondent had violated DR 1-102(A)(4). The panel recommended the sanction suggested by the parties, that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year. The board adopted the panel's finding and its recommendation.
J. Warren Bettis, disciplinary counsel, and Harald F. Craig III, for relator.
Bernard Eugene Reisman, pro se.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board's finding of misconduct and its recommendation. Therefore, respondent is hereby ordered suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of one year. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.