[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In re Application of Tynes, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-631.] 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. 2020-OHIO-631 IN RE APPLICATION OF TYNES. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In re Application of Tynes, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-631.] Attorneys—Character and fitness—Applications to take bar exam and to register as candidate for admission to practice of law—Past criminal conduct— Lack of candor—Applicant permanently barred from reapplying for admission to practice of law. (No. 2019-1097—Submitted October 2, 2019—Decided February 26, 2020.) ON REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness of the Supreme Court, No. 740. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Applicant, John David Tynes, of New Richmond, Ohio, is a 2013 graduate of Northern Kentucky University’s Salmon P. Chase College of Law. In June 2016, we found that Tynes failed to carry his burden of proving that he possessed the requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications to practice law SUPREME COURT OF OHIO in Ohio. This finding was based on his efforts to minimize his culpability for nearly 18-year-old criminal convictions arising from his attempts to persuade girls under the age of 15 to engage in sex acts and on his delay in seeking mental-health treatment that was recommended at the time of his convictions. We therefore disapproved his application to register as a candidate for admission to the practice of law. Although the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness recommended that we prohibit Tynes from seeking admission to the Ohio bar in the future, we authorized him to apply for the July 2018 bar exam or a later bar exam. In re Application of Tynes, 146 Ohio St.3d 243, 2016-Ohio-3307, 54 N.E.3d 1237, ¶ 19-20, 24. {¶ 2} Tynes submitted a new registration application in January 2018 and later applied to take the February 2019 bar exam. {¶ 3} Two members of the Cincinnati Bar Association Admissions Committee interviewed Tynes in November 2018 and recommended that his application be disapproved. At Tynes’s request, a seven-member investigatory subcommittee conducted a second interview, and the admissions committee subsequently recommended that his application be approved. However, the board invoked its authority to investigate his character, fitness, and moral qualifications sua sponte. See Gov.Bar R. I(10)(B)(2)(e). {¶ 4} After a hearing, the board issued a report finding that Tynes had done little to alleviate the concerns that we raised more than three years ago and that the mere passage of time cannot cure those deficiencies. Therefore, the board recommends that Tynes’s pending applications be disapproved ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals