State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Krug

OPALA V.C.J.,

with whom WINCHESTER, J., joins, dissenting.

T1 Respondent's exoneration of ' disciplinary breach charged in both counts is plainly erroncous. Firstly, a lawyer's intent is wholly irrelevant in an inquiry to determine if there was a violation of ORPC 3.3(a)(1)).1 The court's reliance on "intent" is *78henee misplaced.2 Secondly, there is clear and convineing evidence 3 to support respondent's breach of Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct and of Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings.4 Thirdly, the court's act of relieving respondent of the binding effect of her stipulation is,…