Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Colman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 2008No. 53S00-0607-DI-248Published

1DissentDickson, Justice

When the respondent was convicted of a federal felony in 1996, this Court unanimously voted not to disbar but only to suspend his privilege to practice law for a substantial time. Matter of Colman, 691 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind.1998). And we later unanimously agreed to reinstate him. Matter of Colman, 714 N.E.2d 125 (Ind.1999).

On reflection, I should have, but did not, dissent to these per curiam decisions. I choose, however, not to make the same mistake a third time, and agree with Chief Justice Shepard that the respondent should be disbarred for his misconduct.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Matter of ColmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
  2. In re ColmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1999