307 Ga. 676 FINAL COPY
S20Y0434. IN THE MATTER OF DAVID GODLEY RIGDON.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Petition for
Voluntary Discipline of David Godley Rigdon (State Bar No. 689829),
filed prior to the issuance of a formal complaint, pursuant to Bar Rule
4-227 (b) (2). In his petition, Rigdon, who has been a member of the
Bar since 2010, admits to violating Rule 8.4 (a) (2) of the Georgia Rules
of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d),1 by entering a
guilty plea on eight counts of violating the Georgia Controlled
Substances Act, OCGA § 16-13-20 et seq. While the maximum penalty
for a Rule 8.4 (a) (2) violation is disbarment, Rigdon requests the
imposition of a suspension, with conditions on reinstatement, for
either 36 months from the date of his plea or the remaining time in his
five-year term of probation, whichever is longer. Because the record
before us lacks a sufficient factual basis to support the requested
1 This Rule provides: “It shall be a violation of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct for a lawyer to . . . be convicted of a felony.” discipline, we reject the petition and remand to the special master for
further factfinding regarding the conduct giving rise to the criminal
charges against Rigdon.
The record reflects that, in October 2017, Rigdon was indicted in
Tift County on a total of 13 counts for drug-related offenses.
Comprising these charges were eight counts of felony violation of the
Georgia Controlled Substances Act (“GCSA”), in violation of OCGA §
16-13-30 (a); one count of conspiracy to violate the GCSA, in violation
of OCGA § 16-13-33; one count of sale/possession/distribution of
dangerous drugs, in violation of OCGA § 16-13-70 et seq.; and three
counts of crossing the guard lines of a correctional institution with
drugs, in violation of OCGA § 42-5-15. In January 2019, Rigdon pled
guilty to the eight GCSA counts, with the State agreeing to nolle pros
the remaining charges, and Rigdon was sentenced under OCGA § 16-
13-2 (conditional discharge for possession as first offense) to five years’
probation with various conditions.
Upon the State Bar’s petition initiating these disciplinary
proceedings, the Court appointed Chong Joo Kim as special master.
2 Thereafter, Rigdon filed his petition for voluntary discipline, in which
he states that, upon his indictment in October 2017, he voluntarily
ceased the practice of law, notifying his clients of his inability to
continue his representation and refunding all unearned fees. Further,
Rigdon admits that he pled guilty to eight counts of violating the
GCSA and was sentenced to five years’ probation — plus fines totaling
$4,040.50; 40 hours of community service; drug counseling; and
random drug screenings — and he admits that by his plea he has
violated Rule 8.4 (a) (2). In mitigation, Rigdon states that he has never
before been subject to professional discipline; that at the time of the
events leading to his arrest he was suffering from personal and
emotional problems occasioned by his heavy workload and family
responsibilities; that he was diagnosed after his arrest with depression
and anxiety, for which he has since submitted to ongoing, consistent,
and successful treatment; that he contacted the State Bar upon his
indictment, has fully and freely cooperated throughout these
proceedings, and was filing his petition for voluntary discipline prior
to the scheduling of a show-cause hearing; that he has otherwise
3 exhibited good character and integrity, as evidenced by letters of
support from three members of the Georgia Bar submitted with his
petition; that he is remorseful and has acknowledged the nature of his
wrongdoing; and that his misconduct did not result in any injury to a
client. In the letters of support accompanying his petition, Rigdon is
described as intelligent, forthright, kind-hearted, honest, generous,
and professional, and is noted to have served commendably in the
Cordele Public Defender’s Office.
Citing these mitigating factors, Rigdon requests a suspension of
the above-described duration, with reinstatement conditioned on
successful completion of his first offender probation, continued
treatment with a board-certified and licensed mental health
professional, and certification by this professional that Rigdon is fit to
return to the practice of law. While acknowledging that his
misconduct is punishable by disbarment, Rigdon contends that this
Court has opted to impose similar suspensions for Rule 8.4 (a) (2)
violations where justified by mitigating circumstances. See, e.g., In
the Matter of Dale, 304 Ga. 446, 448 (819 SE2d 5) (2018) (suspension
4 for longer of eighteen months or termination of four-year probated
sentence); In the Matter of Corley, 303 Ga. 290, 292-293 (811 SE2d 347)
(2018) (suspension for longer of two years or remainder of term of
probation). In addition, Rigdon argues, the discipline he requests is
within the range imposed in other disciplinary cases involving felony
convictions for illegal drug possession. See, e.g., In the Matter of
Waldrop, 283 Ga. 80, 81-82 (656 SE2d 529) (2008) (24-month
suspension with conditions for first-offender drug possession
conviction); In the Matter of Lewis, 282 Ga. 649, 650 (651 SE2d 729)
(2007) (24-month suspension with conditions for first offender cocaine
possession conviction).
The State Bar has responded in support of Rigdon’s petition,
agreeing that the requested discipline is an appropriate sanction for
the misconduct under the circumstances. In her report, the special
master concurs and recommends that this Court impose the requested
discipline.
As Rigdon observes, this Court has previously recognized that
the existence of significant mitigating circumstances may justify
5 suspension, rather than disbarment, as an appropriate sanction for an
attorney’s Rule 8.4 (a) (2) violation. See, e.g., In the Matter of Barnes,
304 Ga. 324, 326 (818 SE2d 497) (2018) (21-month suspension with
conditions for drug possession and related disorderly conduct
convictions); In the Matter of Topmiller, 293 Ga. 667, 669 (748 SE2d
919) (2013) (18-month suspension with conditions for single drug
possession conviction); Waldrop, 283 Ga. at 81-82; Lewis, 282 Ga. at
650; In the Matter of Caroway, 279 Ga. 381, 383 (613 SE2d 610) (2005)
(24-month suspension with conditions for convictions on three drug
possession counts and DUI); In the Matter of Kitchings, 264 Ga. 301
(444 SE2d 312) (1994) (24-month suspension with conditions for single
felony drug conviction); In the Matter of Patteson, 262 Ga. 591 (423
SE2d 248) (1992) (30-month suspension with conditions for single
felony drug conviction).
Even considering the mitigating factors present in this case,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
307 Ga. 676 FINAL COPY
S20Y0434. IN THE MATTER OF DAVID GODLEY RIGDON.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Petition for
Voluntary Discipline of David Godley Rigdon (State Bar No. 689829),
filed prior to the issuance of a formal complaint, pursuant to Bar Rule
4-227 (b) (2). In his petition, Rigdon, who has been a member of the
Bar since 2010, admits to violating Rule 8.4 (a) (2) of the Georgia Rules
of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d),1 by entering a
guilty plea on eight counts of violating the Georgia Controlled
Substances Act, OCGA § 16-13-20 et seq. While the maximum penalty
for a Rule 8.4 (a) (2) violation is disbarment, Rigdon requests the
imposition of a suspension, with conditions on reinstatement, for
either 36 months from the date of his plea or the remaining time in his
five-year term of probation, whichever is longer. Because the record
before us lacks a sufficient factual basis to support the requested
1 This Rule provides: “It shall be a violation of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct for a lawyer to . . . be convicted of a felony.” discipline, we reject the petition and remand to the special master for
further factfinding regarding the conduct giving rise to the criminal
charges against Rigdon.
The record reflects that, in October 2017, Rigdon was indicted in
Tift County on a total of 13 counts for drug-related offenses.
Comprising these charges were eight counts of felony violation of the
Georgia Controlled Substances Act (“GCSA”), in violation of OCGA §
16-13-30 (a); one count of conspiracy to violate the GCSA, in violation
of OCGA § 16-13-33; one count of sale/possession/distribution of
dangerous drugs, in violation of OCGA § 16-13-70 et seq.; and three
counts of crossing the guard lines of a correctional institution with
drugs, in violation of OCGA § 42-5-15. In January 2019, Rigdon pled
guilty to the eight GCSA counts, with the State agreeing to nolle pros
the remaining charges, and Rigdon was sentenced under OCGA § 16-
13-2 (conditional discharge for possession as first offense) to five years’
probation with various conditions.
Upon the State Bar’s petition initiating these disciplinary
proceedings, the Court appointed Chong Joo Kim as special master.
2 Thereafter, Rigdon filed his petition for voluntary discipline, in which
he states that, upon his indictment in October 2017, he voluntarily
ceased the practice of law, notifying his clients of his inability to
continue his representation and refunding all unearned fees. Further,
Rigdon admits that he pled guilty to eight counts of violating the
GCSA and was sentenced to five years’ probation — plus fines totaling
$4,040.50; 40 hours of community service; drug counseling; and
random drug screenings — and he admits that by his plea he has
violated Rule 8.4 (a) (2). In mitigation, Rigdon states that he has never
before been subject to professional discipline; that at the time of the
events leading to his arrest he was suffering from personal and
emotional problems occasioned by his heavy workload and family
responsibilities; that he was diagnosed after his arrest with depression
and anxiety, for which he has since submitted to ongoing, consistent,
and successful treatment; that he contacted the State Bar upon his
indictment, has fully and freely cooperated throughout these
proceedings, and was filing his petition for voluntary discipline prior
to the scheduling of a show-cause hearing; that he has otherwise
3 exhibited good character and integrity, as evidenced by letters of
support from three members of the Georgia Bar submitted with his
petition; that he is remorseful and has acknowledged the nature of his
wrongdoing; and that his misconduct did not result in any injury to a
client. In the letters of support accompanying his petition, Rigdon is
described as intelligent, forthright, kind-hearted, honest, generous,
and professional, and is noted to have served commendably in the
Cordele Public Defender’s Office.
Citing these mitigating factors, Rigdon requests a suspension of
the above-described duration, with reinstatement conditioned on
successful completion of his first offender probation, continued
treatment with a board-certified and licensed mental health
professional, and certification by this professional that Rigdon is fit to
return to the practice of law. While acknowledging that his
misconduct is punishable by disbarment, Rigdon contends that this
Court has opted to impose similar suspensions for Rule 8.4 (a) (2)
violations where justified by mitigating circumstances. See, e.g., In
the Matter of Dale, 304 Ga. 446, 448 (819 SE2d 5) (2018) (suspension
4 for longer of eighteen months or termination of four-year probated
sentence); In the Matter of Corley, 303 Ga. 290, 292-293 (811 SE2d 347)
(2018) (suspension for longer of two years or remainder of term of
probation). In addition, Rigdon argues, the discipline he requests is
within the range imposed in other disciplinary cases involving felony
convictions for illegal drug possession. See, e.g., In the Matter of
Waldrop, 283 Ga. 80, 81-82 (656 SE2d 529) (2008) (24-month
suspension with conditions for first-offender drug possession
conviction); In the Matter of Lewis, 282 Ga. 649, 650 (651 SE2d 729)
(2007) (24-month suspension with conditions for first offender cocaine
possession conviction).
The State Bar has responded in support of Rigdon’s petition,
agreeing that the requested discipline is an appropriate sanction for
the misconduct under the circumstances. In her report, the special
master concurs and recommends that this Court impose the requested
discipline.
As Rigdon observes, this Court has previously recognized that
the existence of significant mitigating circumstances may justify
5 suspension, rather than disbarment, as an appropriate sanction for an
attorney’s Rule 8.4 (a) (2) violation. See, e.g., In the Matter of Barnes,
304 Ga. 324, 326 (818 SE2d 497) (2018) (21-month suspension with
conditions for drug possession and related disorderly conduct
convictions); In the Matter of Topmiller, 293 Ga. 667, 669 (748 SE2d
919) (2013) (18-month suspension with conditions for single drug
possession conviction); Waldrop, 283 Ga. at 81-82; Lewis, 282 Ga. at
650; In the Matter of Caroway, 279 Ga. 381, 383 (613 SE2d 610) (2005)
(24-month suspension with conditions for convictions on three drug
possession counts and DUI); In the Matter of Kitchings, 264 Ga. 301
(444 SE2d 312) (1994) (24-month suspension with conditions for single
felony drug conviction); In the Matter of Patteson, 262 Ga. 591 (423
SE2d 248) (1992) (30-month suspension with conditions for single
felony drug conviction).
Even considering the mitigating factors present in this case,
however, the Court cannot on the existing record ascertain whether
the proposed discipline is commensurate with Rigdon’s misconduct.
Specifically, the record before us contains virtually no information,
6 apart from the indictment, regarding the factual basis for Rigdon’s
guilty plea, the nature of the conspiracy of which Rigdon was alleged
to have been a part, or the circumstances underlying the three nolle
prossed counts charging Rigdon with crossing the guard lines of a
correctional institution with drugs. Absent this information, this
Court is unable to determine whether the proposed discipline is an
acceptable sanction. Accordingly, we reject Rigdon’s petition for
voluntary discipline and remand to the special master for further
factfinding regarding the conduct giving rise to the criminal charges
against Rigdon.
Petition for voluntary discipline rejected. All the Justices concur.
DECIDED JANUARY 13, 2020. Petition for voluntary discipline. Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, William D. NeSmith III, Deputy General Counsel State Bar, Jenny K. Mittelman, Wolanda R. Shelton, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia. Warren R. Hinds, for Rigdon.