The Oklahoma Supreme Court has reinstated an attorney convicted of subornation of perjury in 2011

Petitioner possesses the good moral character sufficient to entitle him to be admitted to the OBA, and has shown that his conduct as an attorney following reinstatement will conform to the high standards required of a member of the Bar.

Petitioner provided stronger proof of his qualifications than one seeking admission for the first time by earning 51 CLE credits (including 8 legal ethics credits) during his disbarment, knowing that such credits cannot count toward future CLE requirements after reinstatement.

Contrary to the assertions of the OBA, Petitioner’s evidence demonstrates more than just commendable conduct over a substantial period of time and does meet his heavy burden to show that he would act differently if faced with similar pressures and circumstances that led to his conviction.

Petitioner’s own testimony reveals remorse for the disrepute brought upon the legal profession, and consciousness of the wrongfulness and seriousness of the conduct for which he was convicted, despite maintaining his innocence; Petitioner stated he respected and accepted the jury’s verdict, and would not engage in the same or other conduct that would bring disrepute upon the profession; the PRT heard and observed Petitioner’s testimony first hand and was in the best position to judge Petitioner’s truthfulness and sincerity in these regards.

The circumstances of Petitioner’s conviction, disbarment, rehabilitation and reinstatement are similar to those in the case of In Re Reinstatement of Spilman, 2004 OK 79, 104 P.3d 576, where reinstatement was granted, and Petitioner’s Petition for Reinstatement likewise should be approved.

OK had the story of the conviction

An Oklahoma City criminal defense attorney was convicted Wednesday of intentionally letting a witness lie during a 2008 drug trafficking trial.

An Oklahoma County jury found Mark Anthony Clayborne, 48, guilty of perjury by subornation and preparing a false exhibit.

Jurors chose a punishment of four years in prison on one count and two years in prison and a $1,000 fine on the other. Formal sentencing was set for June.

Clayborne represented Jose Cruz Herrera at a jury trial in February 2008. Herrera was convicted at the trial of drug trafficking, conspiracy and cocaine possession. He is serving 102 years in prison.

Prosecutors alleged Clayborne had a witness lie in a failed effort to give Herrera an alibi for the day of a 2007 drug deal. The witness testified at the drug trial that she was with Herrera in Mexico on that day and had videotaped him there.

Prosecutors said Clayborne had her testify even though she told him “straight to his face” beforehand that she did not shoot the video and was afraid she would get into trouble if she testified she had done so.

The videotape actually was shot in 2005 but it had been altered to reflect a date in 2007.

Prosecutors alleged Clayborne put into evidence a shortened version of the altered videotape, knowing the date on it was false.

Clayborne’s attorneys contended he did not know the videotape had been altered and did not know the witness was lying.