ILNews

Justices suspend David Wyser, former Brizzi deputy prosecutor

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former Marion County Deputy Prosecutor David Wyser, who pleaded guilty last year to bribery in a federal public-corruption probe, has been suspended from the practice of law.

Wyser was suspended in an Indiana Supreme Court order issued Wednesday.  The suspension came three months after the Indiana Disciplinary Commission transmitted orders and requested Wyser’s suspension following his guilty plea in July to a bribery charge. Wyser in November avoided a possible prison sentence of up to 10 years and was sentenced to three years of probation.

The former deputy prosecutor now resides in Reno, Nevada, according to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys. Contacted by phone Thursday, Wyser said he had not seen the suspension and declined to comment or answer questions.

Wyser, the chief trial deputy under former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, pleaded guilty to accepting a $2,500 bribe in exchange for facilitating the early release of a woman sentenced in the murder-for-hire of her husband.

Paula Willoughby had been sentenced in 1991 to 110 years in prison in the slaying of her husband Darrell outside Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Willoughby’s sentence was reduced on appeal to 70 years, then modified in July 2009 to time served after Willoughby’s father, businessman Harrison Epperly, made political contributions through his company of at least $28,500 to Brizzi and Wyser in 2006 and 2007.

Wyser had agreed to testify in federal corruption investigations that targeted Brizzi, but the case against Brizzi unraveled last year after a jury cleared three others who the government alleged had improperly funneled money to Brizzi, including his friend and former business partner, John Bales.

Wyser was admitted to practice in Indiana in 1997.  He also is licensed in California, where he was admitted to the bar in 1991. He has been on inactive status there since 1999, according to the State Bar of California’s website.

The Supreme Court’s order was unanimous except for Justice Mark Massa, who did not participate. Spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said Massa explained that he recused himself because he publicly expressed an opinion about the case in April 2010.

Prior to his appointment to the court, Massa unsuccessfully ran to succeed Brizzi as Marion County prosecutor, calling on his fellow Republican to step down.  “I believe the prosecuting attorney should inspire public confidence, not public cynicism,” Massa said at the time.






 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT