In Re Ray

Supreme Court of South Carolina

In Re Ray

214 S.E.2d 328, 264 S.C. 292, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 356

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMay 7, 1975

Docket20008

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 214 S.E.2d 328 (In Re Ray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Ray, 214 S.E.2d 328, 264 S.C. 292, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 356 (S.C. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This disciplinary proceeding was instituted by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, against Samuel B. Ray, Jr., the respondent herein, who has been duly admitted and licensed to practice law in this State.

The complaint alleged that the respondent had committed acts of misconduct which tended to pollute the administration of justice and bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute. It was further alleged that on December 3, 1973, in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Columbia Division, the respondent entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge that he violated Title 26, Section 7203, U. S. Code, and that thereafter on December 7, 1973 he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Section 7203 of the U. S. Cole provides penalties for wilful failure to file a tax return, supply information thereabout, or pay the tax.

A hearing was convened before a duly appointed Panel of the Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and thereafter its report was reviewed by the full Board. It was the recommendation of the Board that the respondent should be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State. The matter is now before the Court upon a rule to show cause why a disciplinary order should not be issued by this Court. The respondent has filed no brief or return challenging the recommendation of the Board and after a full consideration of the record and recommendation of the Board this Court is of the view that such recommendation *294 should be adopted and that the respondent should be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State.

Accordingly, it is ordered that Samuel B. Ray, Jr., the respondent herein, be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State and that he forthwith surrender to the Clerk of this Court his license to practice.

Let this Order be published with the opinions of this Court.

Ness, J., not participating.

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

Per Curiam:

This disciplinary proceeding was instituted by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, against Samuel B. Ray, Jr., the respondent herein, who has been duly admitted and licensed to practice law in this State.

The complaint alleged that the respondent had committed acts of misconduct which tended to pollute the administration of justice and bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute. It was further alleged that on December 3, 1973, in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Columbia Division, the respondent entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge that he violated Title 26, Section 7203, U. S. Code, and that thereafter on December 7, 1973 he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Section 7203 of the U. S. Cole provides penalties for wilful failure to file a tax return, supply information thereabout, or pay the tax.

A hearing was convened before a duly appointed Panel of the Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and thereafter its report was reviewed by the full Board. It was the recommendation of the Board that the respondent should be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State. The matter is now before the Court upon a rule to show cause why a disciplinary order should not be issued by this Court. The respondent has filed no brief or return challenging the recommendation of the Board and after a full consideration of the record and recommendation of the Board this Court is of the view that such recommendation *294 should be adopted and that the respondent should be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State.

Accordingly, it is ordered that Samuel B. Ray, Jr., the respondent herein, be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in this State and that he forthwith surrender to the Clerk of this Court his license to practice.

Let this Order be published with the opinions of this Court.

Ness, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 S.E.2d 328, 264 S.C. 292, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ray-sc-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack