[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Disciplinary Counsel v. Wilcoxson, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3964.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2021-OHIO-3964 DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. WILCOXSON. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Disciplinary Counsel v. Wilcoxson, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3964.] Attorneys—Misconduct—Violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct—Two- year suspension with 18 months stayed on conditions and proof of compliance with terms of Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program contract— Monitored probation in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(21) focused on law- office management and client communications imposed. (No. 2021-0764—Submitted August 3, 2021—Decided November 10, 2021.) ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Professional Conduct of the Supreme Court, No. 2020-049. ______________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Respondent, Clinton Ralph Wilcoxson II, of Dayton, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0061974, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1993. On July 12, 2018, we imposed a conditionally stayed six-month suspension on SUPREME COURT OF OHIO Wilcoxson based on our findings that he had neglected a client matter, failed to reasonably communicate with the client, failed to return the client’s file, and failed to cooperate in the resulting disciplinary investigation. Dayton Bar Assn. v. Wilcoxson, 153 Ohio St.3d 279, 2018-Ohio-2699, 104 N.E.3d 772. {¶ 2} In an August 2020 complaint, relator, disciplinary counsel, alleged that Wilcoxson violated the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to file a brief in a client’s appeal of his criminal conviction, failing to reasonably communicate with the client about the status of the matter, and falsely advising the client’s mother that he had prepared and filed a motion to reopen the appeal. {¶ 3} The parties submitted stipulations of fact and Wilcoxson admitted that he committed all but one of the charged violations. Wilcoxson and a character witness also testified at a hearing before a three-member panel of the Board of Professional Conduct. The board issued a report finding that Wilcoxson committed all the charged misconduct. The board recommended that we suspend him from the practice of law for two years with 18 months conditionally stayed, that an additional condition on his reinstatement to the practice of law be imposed, and that he be required to serve one year of monitored probation. No objections have been filed. We adopt the board’s findings of misconduct and recommended sanction. Misconduct {¶ 4} In January 2019, Scott and Lori O’Connor (“the O’Connors”) retained Wilcoxson to represent their son, Daniel, in his appeal of his criminal conviction. They agreed to pay a flat fee of $5,000—$3,000 up front, with the remaining $2,000 …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals