In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Heard

(dissenting) — The majority’s affirmation of discipline against Attorney James A. Heard rests on two doubtful propositions: (1) we review factual findings of the *427Disciplinary Board rather than findings made by the hearing examiner who actually received the evidence and had the opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses before him; and (2) an attorney may be disciplined for an act of “moral turpitude” without necessity to prove that the act also “reflects disregard for the rule of law.” RLD 1.1(a).

Factual Findings of Hearing Examiner, Not Disciplinary Board, Are Dispositive

The facts…