On Tuesday, October 29, 2024, The Chronicle reported that Dan Petticord, a candidate for the position of Common Pleas judge, is facing a formal complaint from the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct. The complaint was initiated by his opponent, Giovanna Scaletta-Bremke, who alleged that Petticord engaged in misconduct during his judicial campaign.

The complaint centers on a campaign communication from Petticord that included a column titled “His Opponent,” which featured a statement claiming Scaletta-Bremke had been “repeatedly criticized for misleading the court.” This statement was accompanied by an asterisk that directed readers to citations from two cases in which Scaletta-Bremke was involved at the 9th District Court of Appeals.

Petticord serves as the head of the Civil Division for Prosecutor J.D. Tomlinson and has no prior disciplinary record, according to an online attorney database maintained by the Ohio Supreme Court. Scaletta-Bremke, an attorney in private practice, frequently handles appellate work for criminal defendants. Both candidates are vying to succeed Judge James Miraldi, who is unable to run for re-election due to age restrictions.

The complaint alleges that Petticord violated Rule 4.3 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judicial candidates from knowingly publishing false campaign materials or doing so with reckless disregard for the truth. A hearing by the Board of Professional Conduct is set for November 4, 2024, via Zoom, the day before Election Day.

In a phone interview, Scaletta-Bremke expressed her disappointment that the media is covering the complaint, stating that she had initially attempted to resolve the matter privately with Petticord. After those attempts failed, she felt compelled to make the issue public.

Petticord indicated that discussions regarding a joint resolution of the complaint were ongoing. In response to the allegations, he defended his statements about Scaletta-Bremke, asserting that the appellate court rulings confirmed his claims regarding her conduct in the cited cases.

The complaint was confirmed by Scaletta-Bremke, who stated that she filed the initial ethics complaint that led to a review by a panel from the Board of Professional Conduct. This panel, which included three members and its director, Rich Dove, concluded that there was probable cause to pursue formal disciplinary action against Petticord.

The two cases cited in the complaint involve clients represented by Scaletta-Bremke, including Ryan Yatson and Jeffrey Newcomb. Yatson was convicted of felonious assault in 2020 and is currently serving a 14-year prison sentence. His appeal was rejected in 2022, with the court noting that he misrepresented testimony from law enforcement to support his claims of innocence.

In the case of Newcomb, he pleaded guilty to failing to register as a sex offender and received a sentence of probation and jail time. His appeal was also denied, with the court finding that he had selectively quoted statements from his plea hearing to suggest that the trial court had erred.

Scaletta-Bremke has publicly stated that she believes Petticord’s campaign materials are false and defamatory, noting the importance of integrity in judicial races. She emphasized her commitment to maintaining her reputation and upholding the highest ethical standards among legal professionals.

As the election approaches, the outcome of the hearing and its implications for the candidates remain uncertain. The Board of Professional Conduct’s ruling is not expected to be announced before Election Day, leaving voters in the dark about the potential consequences of the complaint as they prepare to make their decision at the polls.

 

 

Source: The Chronicle