Judged Fit
The Ohio Supreme Court has reinstated a suspended former judge.
On application for reinstatement by respondent, James Michael Burge. Application granted. James Michael Burge, Attorney Registration No. 0004659, last known business address in Lorain, Ohio, reinstated to the practice of law
The story from the Cleveland Plain Dealer
The Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated the law license of former Lorain County Judge James Burge who was suspended from practicing less six months ago after a criminal conviction and a history of judicial misconduct.
The Aug. 13 suspension stemmed from a series of issues raised by the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct that included Burge’s behavior on the bench and his criminal conviction for failing to disclose he owned a building that he rented to attorneys who appeared before him in court.
Most notably, Burge acquitted a man charged with rape in 2012 because he believed the man had not penetrated the 14-year-old victim deep enough. During a disciplinary hearing, Burge admitted that he disregarded the legal standards in the case when he tossed out the rape charge and found him guilty of gross sexual imposition, according to the board’s findings.
The appeals court later ruled that Burge erred and that he applied the wrong legal standard when he granted the acquittal.
The Supreme Court ordered the year-long suspension of his law license with the caveat that it would stay six months of the punishment if Burge did not engage in any misconduct.
Burge could not be reached for comment.
An investigation led by the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct uncovered a slew of red flags that included Burge’s failure to disclose that he owned a building that he rented out to attorneys who appeared in his court.
The former judge was convicted in April 2015 on misdemeanor charges for failing to disclose he and his wife’s partial ownership of an office building.
He was ordered to pay $3,000 in fines after his felonies were reduced to misdemeanors because the verdict forms “failed to specify the appropriate offense level for the tampering charges,” an earlier opinion says.
(Mike Frisch)