The Florida Bar v. Kenneth Chesebro

• Court: Supreme Court of Florida
• Decided: June 11, 2026
• Docket: SC2024-1528
• Status: Published

Opinion

Supreme Court of Florida THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 2026

The Florida Bar, SC2024-1528 Complainant Lower Tribunal No(s).: v. 2024-00,120(2A)

Kenneth Chesebro, Respondent

Respondent Kenneth Chesebro entered a guilty plea in Georgia

state court to the felony charge of unlawfully conspiring to file a

false certificate in federal district court. See O.G.C.A. § 16-10-20.1.

However, because the conviction was entered pursuant to Georgia’s

First Offender Act, and Chesebro’s probation was later terminated

early, he was ultimately “exonerated of guilt” and now “stand[s]

discharged as a matter of law.” O.G.C.A. § 42-8-60(e). Indeed,

upon entering a consent order terminating probation, the Georgia

trial court declared that Chesebro “shall not be considered to have

ever had a criminal conviction.”

This matter is unique. We have a duty to regulate the practice

of law in Florida and meaningfully sanction lawyer misconduct. See

art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. But we are also bound to respect the CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Two

judgments of sister states under principles of comity. See art. IV,

§ 1, U.S. Const. It is alleged—and Chesebro does not here

dispute—that he aided in the filing of a false certificate in federal

court. That concession requires us to mete out discipline, even

giving due regard to Chesebro’s exoneration under the law that

governs his prosecution for that act.

We have “the ultimate responsibility to determine the

appropriate sanction.” Fla. Bar v. Patterson, 330 So. 3d 519, 526

(Fla. 2021) (quoting Fla. Bar v. Barrett, 897 So. 2d 1269, 1275 (Fla.

2005)). We must fashion a remedy appropriate to the unique facts

of this case and, after careful deliberation, find that a reprimand is

appropriate. Suspension or a more serious sanction would have

been fitting had Chesebro not been exonerated under the distinct

circumstance presented here; Chesebro’s full discharge under the

Georgia First Offender Act, however, is a fact we do not ignore.

Accordingly, upon consideration of the Report of Referee and

the briefs filed in this case, the Court approves the referee’s

recommendation as to guilt but disapproves the recommended CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Three

discipline and instead reprimands Respondent. Respondent is

directed to attend The Florida Bar’s Ethics School under the terms

and conditions set forth in the referee’s report.

The felony suspension entered on October 28, 2024, is hereby

lifted, and Kenneth Chesebro is reinstated to the practice of law

effective immediately.

Judgment is entered for The Florida Bar, 651 East Jefferson

Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300, for recovery of costs from

Kenneth Chesebro in the amount of $2,229.37, for which sum let

execution issue.

MUÑIZ, C.J., and COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. TANENBAUM, J., concurs in the administrative disposition but dissents from the judgment for costs. LABARGA, J., dissents with an opinion.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED.

LABARGA, J., dissenting.

Respondent Kenneth Chesebro, a member of The Florida Bar,

was indicted in Fulton County, Georgia, on multiple felony charges

relating to allegations of election fraud and interference with the CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Four

2020 presidential election. For the purpose of this Bar disciplinary

proceeding, “[i]t is alleged—and Chesebro does not here dispute—

that he aided in the filing of a false certificate in federal court.”

Order at 2.

In Georgia, Chesebro ultimately pled guilty to the crime of

Conspiracy to Commit Filing False Documents as alleged in Count

15 of the indictment and was sentenced to five years of felony

probation. Count 15 alleged that Chesebro and several

codefendants engaged in an unlawful conspiracy “to knowingly file,

enter, and record,” “in a court of the United States,” a slate of false

electors for the State of Georgia. (Emphasis added.) Specifically,

the indictment alleged that Chesebro and the codefendants certified

that the signatories to the document were the “duly elected and

qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United

States of America from the State of Georgia.” Chesebro and the

codefendants transmitted the votes to the Chief Judge of the United

States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Five

Given his guilty plea to Conspiracy to Commit Filing False

Documents, The Florida Bar filed a Notice of Determination or

Judgment of Guilt against Chesebro. This Court referred the

matter to a referee and, after conducting an evidentiary hearing, the

referee issued a report recommending that Chesebro be found guilty

of misconduct justifying disciplinary measures and that he be

suspended from the practice of law for 30 days.

The referee’s recommended sanction was within the bounds

set forth by Florida Standard for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 7.1(b),

which dictates that a suspension is appropriate in cases involving

deceptive conduct or statements in the following circumstances:

“[W]hen a lawyer knowingly engages in conduct that is a violation of

a duty owed as a professional with the intent to obtain a benefit for

the lawyer or another and causes injury or potential injury to a

client, the public, or the legal system.” (Emphasis added.)

Disregarding the referee’s recommended sanction of a 30-day

suspension, the majority has instead issued a written public

reprimand. However, a public reprimand is inconsistent with CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Six

Standard 7.1(c), which provides that a “[p]ublic reprimand is

appropriate when a lawyer negligently engages in conduct that is a

violation of a duty owed as a professional and causes injury or

potential injury to a client, the public, or the legal system.”

(Emphasis added.) Because the discharge of Chesebro’s conviction

pursuant to Georgia’s First Offender Act does not undo his admitted

act of misconduct, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that

suspension is inappropriate.

Again, as the majority’s order observes, Chesebro does not

dispute that he submitted fraudulent ballot information to the Chief

Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District

of Georgia. In my view, the intentional commission of fraud upon

the court is one of the most egregious ethical transgressions a

lawyer can commit, and such serious misconduct necessitates the

imposition of severe professional sanctions. A written reprimand as

issued by the majority in this case is not only inconsistent with the

Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions but

disproportionate to the severity of Chesebro’s grave ethical CASE NO.: SC2024-1528 Page Seven

violations, which “cause[d] injury or potential injury to . . . the

public, or the legal system.”

Lawyers, acting as officers of the court, are ethically bound to

uphold the integrity of the judicial process. Consequently, the

knowing submission of fraudulent Electoral College documentation

to a federal court constitutes an intolerable breach of professional

ethics. Given the magnitude of Chesebro’s ethical transgressions, I

certainly would not impose a sanction that falls below the referee’s

recommended sanction.

I therefore respectfully dissent.

A True Copy Test:

SC2024-1528 6/11/2026

SO Served: KENNETH CHESEBRO HON. JAMES LEE MARSH MARK LUGO MASON PATRICIA ANN TORO SAVITZ LAUREN MICHELLE WILLIAMS