In re Stoner

272 S.E.2d 313, 246 Ga. 581, 1980 Ga. LEXIS 1208
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 29, 1980
DocketSupreme Court Disciplinary No. 142
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 272 S.E.2d 313 (In re Stoner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Stoner, 272 S.E.2d 313, 246 Ga. 581, 1980 Ga. LEXIS 1208 (Ga. 1980).

Opinion

Per curiam.

On May 14, 1980, Respondent, Jessee Benjamin Stoner, was convicted of a felony in Jefferson County, Alabama. A disciplinary action was brought against him in this state and after notice and a hearing, the Special Master recommended that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law pending the outcome of his [582]*582appeals.

Decided October 29, 1980.

1. Respondent contends that to suspend him from the practice of law before his appeals are final violates due process. We find this argument to be without merit. The purpose of suspension and disbarment in this state is not to punish the attorney, but to protect the courts and the public from persons deemed to be unfit to practice as attorneys. See Yarbrough v. State, 119 Ga. App. 46 (166 SE2d 35) (1969). The state has a legitimate interest in such matters. “The relation of courts and attorneys to the people is one of high responsibility, involving complete trust and confidence and absolute fidelity to integrity.” Gordon v. Clinkscales, 215 Ga. 843, 846 (114 SE 2d 15) (1960). “[T]he appearance of a convicted attorney continuing to practice does more to disrupt public confidence in the legal profession than any other disciplinary problem. Members of the Bar must maintain a high standard of conduct. If the law is to be respected, the public must be able to respect the individuals who administer it. By failing to swiftly discipline an attorney found guilty of a serious offense, we necessarily impair the public’s confidence in the law and in this Court’s willingness to enforce the law evenhandedly.” The Florida Bar v. Prior, 330 S2d 697, 702 (1976).

We find that promoting public confidence in the judicial system is a legitimate state end and that suspending attorneys upon conviction of a crime of moral turpitude, even before all appeals are final, is rationally related to that end.

While we recognize that some states do not act to suspend attorneys until appeals are final (see, e.g., In the Matter of a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, John A. Metheany, 104 Ariz. 144 (449 P2d 609) (1969)), this is not the rule in Georgia. We conclude that such a rule is not constitutionally required, as indicated above.

2. Respondent’s contention that the felony of “Setting Off Dynamite Dangerously Near An Inhabited Dwelling” is not a crime involving moral turpitude is patently without merit. See Lewis v. State, 243 Ga. 443 (254 SE2d 830) (1979).

3. Respondent’s suspension from the practice of law does not violate the constitutional rights of his clients. The right to counsel does not mean the right to the counsel of one’s own choosing in every situation. See Fleming v. State, 246 Ga. 90 (270 SE2d 185) (1980).

There being no constitutional infirmity in the provisions of Rule 4-106, it is ordered that Jessee Benjamin Stoner be and hereby is suspended from the practice of law in all courts of this state until further order of this court.

All the Justices concur. Omer W. Franklin, Jr., General Counsel State Bar, Joe David Jackson, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, D. Nichols Winn, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia. Jessee Benjamin Stoner, pro se.

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

Related

In the Matter of W. McCall Calhoun, Jr
895 S.E.2d 258 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2023)
In the Matter of Chandra McNeil Norton
883 S.E.2d 310 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2023)
In the Matter of Gregory Bartko
864 S.E.2d 39 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2021)
in the Matter of Rand J. Csehy
Supreme Court of Georgia, 2014
In re Csehy
764 S.E.2d 540 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2014)
In Re Cunningham
669 S.E.2d 93 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2008)
In Re Waldrop
656 S.E.2d 529 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2008)
In Re Caroway
613 S.E.2d 610 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2005)
In re Horn
505 S.E.2d 21 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)
In re Swearingen
501 S.E.2d 200 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)
In re Acree
495 S.E.2d 293 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)
Matter of Calhoun
492 S.E.2d 514 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1997)
In re CARLSON
489 S.E.2d 834 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1997)
Matter of Carlson
489 S.E.2d 834 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1997)
In re Holloway
469 S.E.2d 167 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1996)
Matter of Washburn
464 S.E.2d 192 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
In re Witt
452 S.E.2d 507 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
In the Matter of Stoner
314 S.E.2d 214 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1984)
In Re Stoner
507 F. Supp. 490 (N.D. Georgia, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
272 S.E.2d 313, 246 Ga. 581, 1980 Ga. LEXIS 1208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-stoner-ga-1980.