Justices decline to discipline attorney convicted of homicide (UPDATE)

Listen to this article

A Manitowish Waters attorney who was convicted of killing his brother while driving drunk in 2002 will not face discipline, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Friday.

Daniel Johns Jr. was driving his truck, with his brother as passenger, when he drove off the highway and into a tree. His brother was ejected from the car and hit the tree, according to the court’s opinion.

In June 2004, Johns pleaded guilty to homicide by use of a vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration. Before he was sentenced, his attorney called the Office of Lawyer Regulation to ask whether a conviction would mean an automatic revocation of his license. The OLR told the attorney that was not necessarily the case, as that determination would depend on the nature of the crime.

Johns was sentenced to 120 days in jail and served half of that time. But the OLR did not file a case against him until November 2011, after the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel highlighted his conviction in a story, according to the opinion.

The court, in a per curiam decision, ruled that Johns’ conviction “does not call into question his ability to competently and vigorously represent clients.”

“This case is far different from those in which an attorney abused his or her professional status as a lawyer in committing a criminal act,” according to the opinion. “Attorney Johns violated no practice norms. He harmed no clients. He did not benefit from his misconduct. He has been arrested, convicted, sentenced, jailed, and supervised on probation. He will forever have a heavy conscience regarding this incident.”

Another charge, which pertained to Johns’ supposed failure to notify the OLR of his conviction, was also dismissed, because the OLR was contacted prior to his sentencing.

“This was a violation of the most technical variety,” according to the court’s decision. “It is undisputed that, due to the telephone conversation between Attorney Johns’ lawyer and the OLR’s deputy director on the day of Attorney Johns’ plea hearing, the OLR had actual knowledge of the conviction from the day it was entered.”

Johns did not return a phone call. His attorney in the OLR cases, Dean Dietrich of Ruder Ware LLSC, said he was pleased with the court’s decision.

“The court seemed to acknowledge that this was a very difficult situation,” Dietrich said, “and that under the circumstances, it was better for Mr. Johns to just move on with his life.”

In her dissent, Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson said Johns should be found to be in violation of the rules. However, she said she would not impose discipline, in part because of Johns’ “stellar record for the last decade.”

His case shows the need, according to her dissent, to examine the attorney discipline system “to determine whether revisions are needed.”

Justice Ann Walsh Bradley did not participate. She did not give a reason, though her husband works at Ruder Ware. Follow @eheisigWLJ