Legal Opinion

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Brucato

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 1997No. 96-2431PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

In Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 71, 73, 609 N.E.2d 149, 150, an attorney pled guilty to conspiracy to launder profits from illegal drug sales. In Williams, we said that “[disbarment is the only appropriate sanction,” even though the government stipulated that the defendant was the “least culpable participant in the scheme [and] rendered ‘substantial, timely, truthful and complete’ cooperation with the government and accepted responsibility for his crime.” Id. at 73, 609 N.E.2d at 150.

In this case, respondent’s participation was close to if not greater than the level…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. BrucatoOhio Supreme Court · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API