In the Matter of: Marietto V. MASSILLAMANY, Respondent
Loretta H. Rush, Chief Justice of Indiana. All Justices concur.
PUBLISHED ORDER APPROVING STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT FOR DISCIPLINE
Loretta H. Rush, Chief Justice of Indiana
Pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23(11), the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and Respondent have submitted for approval a " Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline" stipulating agreed facts and proposed discipline as summarized below:
Stipulated Facts: Respondent was admitted to practice in Indiana in May 2004. The bar application asked for full disclosure of both criminal convictions and accusations of violations of the law. In 2000, he had been convicted of operating a vehicle with a BAC equivalent between 0.08 and 0.25, a class C misdemeanor. He reported this conviction on his 2003 bar application. He had also been charged in 1996 with Minor in a Tavern, a class C misdemeanor, which was resolved through a pre-trial diversion agreement. Respondent did not report this charge in his initial 2003 application nor in a renewed application.
In 2010, Respondent pled guilty to operating a vehicle while intoxicated (" OWI" ) endangering a person, a class A misdemeanor, for which he received an agreed public reprimand. See Matter of Massillamany, 946 N.E.2d 581 (Ind. 2011). Based on an incident on or about July 11, 2013, Respondent was charged with OWI with a prior conviction within five years, a class D felony. He self-reported this incident to the Commission on July 17, 2013. He pled guilty on April 9, 2014, and promptly notified the Commission of this conviction.
Aggravating and mitigating facts. Respondent's prior discipline is a fact in aggravation. The parties cite the following facts in mitigation: (1) Respondent was cooperative with the Commission, including promptly reporting his 2014 conviction; and (2) Respondent voluntarily enrolled in Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (" JLAP" ) shortly after his latest arrest and has since participated successfully in programs addressing alcohol dependency.
Violations: The parties agree that Respondent violated these Indiana Professional Conduct Rules prohibiting the following misconduct:
8.1(a): Knowingly making a false statement of material fact to the Board of Law Examiners in connection with a bar admission application.
8.1(b): Failure to disclose relevant facts to the Board of Law Examiners.
8.4(b): Committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on Respondent's trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer.
Discipline: The Court, having considered the submission of the parties, now approves the following agreed discipline.
For Respondent's professional misconduct, the Court suspends Respondent from the practice of law for a period of six months, beginning December 1, 2014, with 120 days actively served and the remainder stayed subject to completion of at least three years of probation under a JLAP long-term monitoring agreement. The Court incorporates by reference the ...