On Monday, April 24, 2023, the Disciplinary Counsel filed its answer to the objections to the findings of facts of Jason Warner, a former Common Pleas Court Judge in Marion County, before the Supreme Court of Ohio.
The case is entitled “Disciplinary Counsel v. Jason Warner, ” with case no. 2023-0180.
The charges cited Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 1.1, 1.2, 8.4(b), 8.4(c), 8.4(d), and 8.4(h) which states that:
A judge shall comply with the law.
A judge shall at all times act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary and avoid the appearance of impropriety.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to commit an illegal act that reflects on a lawyer’s honesty or trustworthiness.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving fraud, dishonesty, deceit, or misrepresentation.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to commit an illegal act that reflects on a lawyer’s honesty or trustworthiness.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law.
On February 3, 2023, the Board of Professional Conduct of the Supreme Court of Ohio recommended the indefinite suspension of the respondent in relation to his felony convictions. According to the findings of facts, the respondent and his wife were involved in an automobile accident on June 3, 2020. Due to the said event, Warner and his wife were indicted on multiple felonies, went to trial, and were ultimately found guilty of complicity in leaving the scene of an accident, and tampering with evidence on March 11, 2021.
The Finding of Facts states:
“The impact caused the other vehicle to leave the roadway and strike a utility pole. Both Respondent and his wife exited their Jeep and approached the other car which was significantly damaged. Respondent called out, “Are you okay? Can you hear me?” but got no response. At that point, Respondent and his wife got back into their damaged car and Mrs. Warner drove home. At no time while at the scene, on the way home, or after reaching their home did Respondent (whose cellphone was in the vehicle’s cupholder) or his wife make any effort to contact emergency authorities to report the accident or to obtain help for the other vehicle’s occupant.”
The Finding of Facts continues:
“Pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V, Section 12, the Board of Professional Conduct considered this matter on February 3, 2023. The Board voted to adopt findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation of the hearing panel and recommends that Respondent, Jason Daniel Warner, be suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in Ohio, with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension imposed on March 12, 2021. The Board further recommends that the Respondent be ordered to pay the costs of this proceeding.”
On March 17, 2023, the respondent filed his objections to the finding of facts stating that the Board of Professional Conduct cannot recommend an appropriate sanction when if the panel fails to report to the Board the relevant and undisputed evidence and testimony which should be considered by the Board when recommending a sanction to the court. Secondly, the Board stated that an indefinite suspension from the practice of law with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension is not warranted in a case involving an isolated event arising out of an accident, especially when the respondent was not even the principal offender and when the evidence is clear that respondent’s inappropriate “conduct” did not involve any affirmative action but rather what he “could have” and “should have” done under the circumstances.
Following his objections, the Disciplinary Counsel filed its answer stating that in contrast to the respondent’s argument, the Board considered all the relevant evidence before recommending the imposition of an indefinite suspension. Moreover, the board added that this suspension with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension is the appropriate sanction.
The Relator’s answer states:
“The Board’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and sanction recommendation are supported by clear and convincing evidence as outlined in the report. Respondent’s argument that the panel failed to appraise the Board of relevant information is contradicted by the plain reading of the Board’s report. He argues that the Board could not have reached a proper sanction recommendation without this information. However, the Board report contains a statement of facts upon which its recommendation is based, including, but not limited to, the respondent’s conviction for two felony offenses. Respondent argued that because the Board’s opinion is less than eight pages, the panel must not have provided all the relevant evidence from the hearing to the Board. Respondent’s argument is speculative, inaccurate, and not supported by the facts summarized in the Board’s report.”
The Relator’s answer continues:
“But, in weighing a sanction recommendation, the Board considered the fact that respondent’s conduct, “although reprehensible and abhorrent, stemmed from a single, unpremeditated event.” This factor led the Board to recommend an indefinite suspension rather than disbarment. Respondent fails to comprehend that the egregious nature of his misconduct demands a significant sanction. As he continues to deny culpability, an indefinite suspension with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension is the appropriate sanction in this case.”
In lieu of the facts and the arguments made by the Disciplinary Counsel, the latter stated that the respondent’s serious misconduct warrants the Board’s recommended sanction of an indefinite suspension with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension.
The Conclusion states:
“The panel and the Board considered all relevant evidence in reaching its recommendation. Respondent has been convicted of two felony offenses relating to his actions after a serious car accident. He continues to dispute his convictions for Conspiracy to Leave the Scene of an Accident and conspiracy to Tamper with Evidence, despite the appellate court upholding his convictions. Respondent — a sitting judge at the time of the incident — has admitted that he left the victim of the car accident for dead without seeking any assistance for him. Respon dent’s serious misconduct warrants the Board’s recommended sanction of an indefinite suspension with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension.”
Mr. Jason Daniel Warner earned his law degree from Ohio State University, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, graduating in 1993.
Warner’s former courtroom is located at 100 N. Main St. Marion, OH, and can be reached at (740) 223-4270. His info can be found on Trellislaw.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
