Disciplinary Counsel v. Sarver

Attorney Jason Allan Sarver (defendant) first met J. B. when Sarver represented J. B.’s then-boyfriend in a legal matter. J. B. subsequently contacted Sarver for assistance with her own criminal case. Sarver met J. B. to discuss the matter over drinks. The two then had sex in Sarver’s car. J. B. was ultimately indicted on multiple felonies. J. B. avoided arrest for nearly a month because Sarver told her to turn off her phone’s GPS. Because of J. B.’s indigent status, the court appointed Sarver as J. B.’s counsel. The two continued having sex. On one occasion, Sarver and J. B. trespassed to use Sarver’s neighbor’s hot tub. During the same time period, Sarver filed a petition to run for county prosecuting attorney. Detectives interviewed J. B., and in exchange for a lesser sentence, J. B. admitted that she and Sarver had sex on multiple occasions. J. B. told detectives that Sarver had insinuated that he would help with her case in exchange for sex. Sarver ultimately pleaded guilty to four misdemeanors as a result of using his neighbor’s hot tub and telling J. B. to turn off her phone’s GPS. As part of the plea, Sarver withdrew his candidacy for prosecuting attorney. Disciplinary counsel (plaintiff) charged Sarver with violating Professional Conduct Rule 1.8(j), which prohibited attorneys from having sexual relations with their clients unless the two were in a consensual sexual relationship before the representation commenced. A hearing board found that Sarver violated the rule but noted that the relationship was consensual and that no actual harm came to J. B. because she leveraged the relationship in exchange for a reduced sentence. The board also found that Sarver had been punished in other ways, including criminal prosecution and withdrawing from running for prosecuting attorney. The board recommended a two-year stayed suspension. The matter came before the Ohio Supreme Court.