The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission wants to set a new standard of “actual prejudice” for attorney misconduct. In making that argument, the validity of two high-profile murder convictions that Carl Brizzi secured during his time as prosecutor in the state’s largest county are being questioned.
See who has been suspended, received a public reprimand, and who resigned.
When deciding that a judge must be suspended and determining when that time off the bench should be, decision-makers must maintain a delicate balance.
Two recent rulings by the Indiana Supreme Court send a message to any attorney who might be accused of misconduct and face disciplinary proceedings.
The Indiana Supreme Court has appointed Indianapolis attorney Jane H. Conley as Judge Pro Tempore in Marion Superior Court, according to a Feb. 16 order posted on the court’s website this week.
A 30-day unpaid suspension begins next week for Marion Superior Traffic Judge William Young, though the chief justice expects the Indiana Supreme Court would have issued a lengthier sanction if a settlement had not been reached in the misconduct case.
A 30-day suspension without pay begins next week for Marion Superior Traffic Judge William Young.
The Indiana Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded a Hamilton County attorney for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.5(a) by making agreements for and charging unreasonable fees.
The Indiana Supreme Court has ordered a six month suspension for an Indiana lawyer who primarily practices in Michigan, not because of the misconduct committed, but more specifically because of the attorney’s bad behavior during the disciplinary process.
While the ex-prosecutor in the state’s largest county waits to hear whether he will get a black mark for misconduct on his record, the Marion County disciplinary action against Carl Brizzi has broader professional conduct implications for attorneys throughout Indiana.
Former Marion County prosecutor Carl Brizzi took the stand today, defending himself against attorney misconduct charges alleging that he violated professional conduct rules by public statements made on pending cases.
Complaints based on a misconduct rule regarding how an attorney could offend others through prejudicial words or actions resulted in disciplinary orders in May and December 2010.
The Indiana Supreme Court couldn’t agree on the appropriate sanction for an attorney who engaged in an improper ex parte communication with a judge, leaving one judge to argue for at least a 90-day suspension.
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended 12 attorneys for remaining delinquent regarding compliance with certain continuing legal education requirements for the period ending Dec. 31, 2009.