In re Cheslek

741 N.E.2d 1244, 2001 Ind. LEXIS 128, 2001 WL 135394
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 2001
DocketNo. 64S00-9909-DI-503
StatusPublished

This text of 741 N.E.2d 1244 (In re Cheslek) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Cheslek, 741 N.E.2d 1244, 2001 Ind. LEXIS 128, 2001 WL 135394 (Ind. 2001).

Opinion

ORDER APPROVING STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT FOR DISCIPLINE

Pursuant to Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section 11, the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and the respondent have submitted for approval a Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline stipulating a proposed discipline and agreed facts as summarized below:

Facts: On August 10, 1999, the respondent was found guilty of theft, a class D felony, based on his having shoplifted items from a department store. On September 8, 1999, the sentencing court entered judgment of conviction against the respondent for theft as a class A misde[1245]*1245meanor pursuant to the alternative misdemeanor sentencing provisions of I.C. 35-50-2-7(b).

Violations: The respondent violated Ind. Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(b), which prohibits a lawyer from committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects. He also violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), which prohibits a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

Discipline: Twelve (12) month suspension from the practice of law in this state, beginning January 27, 2000, the date of his pendente lite suspension, after which any reinstatement to the practice of law in this state is conditioned upon his successful petition before this Court.

The Court, having considered the submission of the parties, now APPROVES and ORDERS the agreed discipline. Costs of this proceeding are assessed against the respondent.

All Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
741 N.E.2d 1244, 2001 Ind. LEXIS 128, 2001 WL 135394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cheslek-ind-2001.