Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Daniel W. Johns, Jr.

¶ 49. (dissenting). The OLR charged Attorney Johns with two violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys. I conclude that the two violations were proved, but I would not impose any discipline.

¶ 50. Attorney Johns agrees (as he must) that he violated the Rules by failing to notify the clerk of the supreme court and OLR in writing of his felony conviction. Attorney Johns disputes whether his conviction of vehicular homicide violated the Rules.

¶ 51. The referee agreed with Attorney Johns that he violated only one provision of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys,…