THE FLORIDA BAR RE: MICHAEL JOSEPH JAHN
No. 72,182
Supreme Court of Florida
559 So. 2d 1089;
1990 Fla. LEXIS 64;
15 Fla. L. Weekly S 36
January 18, 1990
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: As Modified on Denial of Rehearing May 2, 1990.
PRIOR HISTORY:
[**1]
Original Proceeding - The Florida Bar.
COUNSEL: John A. Weiss, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner.
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director and John T. Berry, Staff Counsel,
Tallahassee, Florida; and Jan Wichrowski, Bar Counsel, Orlando, Florida, for
Respondent, The Florida Bar.
JUDGES: Ehrlich, C.J., and Overton, McDonald, Shaw, Barkett, Grimes and Kogan, JJ.,
concur.
OPINIONBY: PER CURIAM
OPINION:
[*1089] MODIFIED OPINION
We have before us a petition for
reinstatement to membership in The Florida Bar. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V,
section 15, Florida Constitution, and rule 3-7.9, Rules Regulating The Florida
Bar. Although the
referee recommends
reinstatement, we find that Jahn should not be reinstated at this time.
In 1985 Jahn was convicted of two
felonies, possession of
cocaine and delivery of
cocaine to a minor, and received two concurrent terms of imprisonment, after which
this Court
suspended him from the practice of law.
The Florida Bar v. Jahn, 509 So.2d 285 (Fla. 1987). In March 1988 Jahn filed a petition for
reinstatement, but this Court did not appoint a
referee until October 1988 because of Jahn's delay in paying the costs assessed in the
original disciplinary proceedings. The
referee
[**2] held a hearing in February
1989 and, finding that Jahn had his
drug addiction under control and that he had rehabilitated himself, recommended
reinstatement. The bar contests Jahn's
reinstatement, based on Jahn's falsifying his
resume and concealing his criminal history while seeking employment.
[*1090] Jahn testified before the
referee that several prospective employers refused to consider him further when he
disclosed his
felony convictions. He then purposely altered his
resume to conceal his convictions, imprisonment, and suspension in applying for a
position as a trust officer with NCNB and intentionally failed to disclose his
past history in numerous interviews with NCNB personnel. NCNB hired Jahn, but,
after receiving an anonymous tip about his criminal record, fired him
immediately. The
referee considered this incident and concluded:
"Thus, the critical question is" Which one is the real Michael Jahn -- the one who
kicked
cocaine or the one who lied to NCNB?' In view of the totality of the evidence, I opt
for the
one who
kicked
cocaine." The bar, on the other hand, sees this incident as
demonstrating Jahn's lack of
rehabilitation.
"Reinstatement is more a matter of grace than of right
[**3] and is dependent upon
rehabilitation."
In re Stoller, 160 Fla. 769, 770, 36 So.2d 443, 444 (1948). A petitioner seeking
reinstatement bears the heavy burden of establishing
rehabilitation, and one element to be considered in regard to
reinstatement is the petitioner's character.
In re Timson, 301 So.2d 448 (Fla. 1974);
In re Dawson, 131 So.2d 472 (Fla. 1961). In this respect
reinstatement is analogous to initial admission to the bar where we have held that an
applicant's demonstration of
good moral character is necessary to protect the public.
Florida Board of Bar Examiners re G.W.L., 364 So.2d 454 (Fla. 1978). Finding a lack of
good moral character is not
restricted to acts reflecting moral turpitude, but, rather, includes
"acts and conduct which would cause a reasonable man to have substantial doubts
about an individual's honesty, fairness and respect for the rights of others
and for the laws of the state and nation."
Id. at 458. Anything less would not protect the public interest sufficiently.
Jahn points out that he has been
suspended for more than four years. Practicing law, however, is a privilege, not a
right.
Petition of Wolf, 257 So.2d 547 (Fla. 1972).
[**4] The mere passage of time is not evidence of
rehabilitation.
See id.
Jahn admitted that his primary motive for
lying to NCNB was to secure a better-paying job in Miami so that he could leave
Orlando. He also stated that he intended to make a full disclosure to NCNB
eventually. Jahn told the
referee that he had made a serious error in judgment.
Demonstrating
rehabilitation, however, requires more than recitations of good intent and contrition.
As the
referee found, Jahn is conquering his
drug addiction, and we sympathize with this plight. This Court does not operate in a vacuum
and we recognize that this is a highly competitive and materialistic society.
But,
"if the concept of discipline and the protection of the public, as well as the
image of The Florida Bar, are to have any meaning at all, cases such as this
must be viewed in the cold light of objectivity and without regard to personal
sympathy."
Wolf, 257 So.2d at 550. We cannot condone placing money and the things money can buy above ethics and
integrity.
A
referee's findings of fact are presumed to be correct and will be upheld if supported by
competent substantial evidence.
The Florida Bar v. Della-Donna, no. 69,324
[**5] (Fla. June 29, 1989). Jahn's
lying, primarily for personal pecuniary gain, casts so much doubt on his character
and his fitness to
practice law that we must agree with the bar that the
referee erred in recommending
reinstatement at this time. Therefore, we deny the petition. Judgment for costs in the
amount of $ 1,296.56 is hereby entered against Jahn, for which sum let
execution issue.
It is so ordered.
