Domestic Violence Suspension

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has suspended an attorney for six months, backdated to his August  1, 2023 interim suspension

 On January 23, 2023, Respondent was arrested and charged in Cleveland County, Oklahoma with a felony – Domestic Assault and Battery by Strangulation and two misdemeanors – Public Intoxication and Domestic Assault and Battery in the Presence of a Minor Child. On that evening, Respondent’s wife called the police and reported that she and their 16-year-old daughter were home when an extremely drunk Respondent punched her, kicked her, and grabbed her throat. She reported that she hit Respondent in self-defense, and that she and her daughter hid inside a room to wait for the police as Respondent fled the home and began walking down the street. He was found in a public area by police in his pajama pants with no shirt, no shoes, and one sock. At the scene, officers photographed red marks on wife’s throat.

Respondent plead no contest to a reduced charge of misdemeanor Domestic Assault and Battery and to Public Intoxication, as the District Attorney dismissed the felony Domestic Assault and Battery in the Presence of a Minor Child charge. Respondent admits that he entered the plea, and a finding of guilt was deferred for one year from March 31, 2023, to March 30, 2024, with rules and conditions of probation ordered by the district court. Probation terms required a Domestic Violence Inventory Assessment, alcohol addiction treatment, and aftercare treatment for his alcohol addiction. The Bar Association filed A Notice of Criminal Conviction with this Court on June 15, 2023.

Respondent’s position

Respondent filed a brief with the Court in which he readily acknowledges a long-term alcohol addiction and excessive alcohol use on January 21, 2023, when the crimes were committed. After his arrest, the Respondent took responsibility for his actions, entered a plea to the crimes and began treatment. He does not challenge the finding that the crimes demonstrate his unfitness to practice law and does not seek a hearing before the Professional Responsibility Tribunal. Instead, Respondent offers evidence in mitigation and requests the Court impose appropriate and fair discipline. Respondent requests (a) that the immediate interim suspension be lifted, (b) that he be reprimanded in some manner, (c) that he be required to continue substance abuse treatment or receive a deferred suspension, and (d) that he be allowed to return to the practice of law.

The court found mitigation

Respondent Lockard offers character reference letters from his O.I.D.S. supervisor who has known Respondent since 1997, from the O.I.D.S. Executive Director who has known him for more than 25 years, his wife of 25 years, four co-workers (two attorneys, an assistant, and an investigator), and two practicing attorney friends of many years. What each of these letters have in common is that 1) they were all shocked and surprised at his inebriation, 2) that he is a talented attorney, 3) that his wife and daughter are important to him, 4) and that he is extremely remorseful and willing to do what it takes to be sober.

Mrs. Lockard expressed her desire for her husband to keep practicing law to support their family and pay for medical insurance. Most important, she was relieved that the incident resulted in her husband’s desire to be sober and seek treatment for his alcoholism.

Sanction

Substance abuse may be considered a mitigating factor in determining professional misconduct, but it does not shield the attorney from accountability. State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass’n v. Doris, 1999 OK 94 ¶ 39, 991 P.2d 1015, 1025. This Court also recognizes that discipline may be mitigated when a lawyer understands the adverse effect of his substance abuse and cooperates in treating it. State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass’n v. Giger, 2001 OK 96, ¶ 16, 37 P.3d 856, 863. But more importantly, and coupled with the substance abuse issue, is Respondents’ act of domestic violence, and committed near a child.

This Court takes domestic violence seriously when considering discipline. In Zannotti, 2014 OK 25 at ¶ 24, the Court held “As incidents of domestic and intimate partner abuse rise and become the focus of legislation, … and public attention, it becomes more incumbent on this Court to protect the public by sending a message to other lawyers that this misconduct is considered a serious breach of a lawyer’s ethical duty and will not be tolerated.” Although Respondent is on the correct path to sobriety and turning around his life, this Court must consider all the circumstances when considering whether he is ready to represent clients and practice law. The evidence presented was appropriate but also lacked assurance to the Court that he is ready to begin his important role as a lawyer representing persons on death row without first completing his criminal case probationary requirements.

CONCLUSION

With the Respondent’s support system, the patience of his employer and his family, and the requirements set for recovery that will be monitored by the trial court, we hope that he succeeds. To ensure the completion of recovery, and to respond to the seriousness of his offenses, the Court imposes a six-month suspension from the date of interim suspension.

(Mike Frisch)