Disciplinary Counsel v. Stuard
Ohio Supreme Court
901 N.E.2d 788 (2009)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Judge John Stuard and attorney Christopher Becker (plaintiffs) were the presiding judge and prosecutor in a capital murder trial. After the jury found the defendant guilty, Judge Stuard asked Becker to prepare and write the court’s sentencing opinion for the sentencing hearing. Becker drafted the opinion, Stuard reviewed it and noted corrections, and Becker made the corrections. Defense counsel was unaware of any of these communications until it became obvious at the sentencing hearing that the prosecutors had prior access to the sentencing opinion. A state disciplinary board (plaintiff) held that Stuard and Becker had violated the rules of judicial and professional conduct, and the case came before the supreme court of Ohio for determination of appropriate sanctions.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 964,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,006 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,006 law school casebooks.

