Ohio Assistant Prosecutor Suspended for Lying to Judge

An Ohio part-time assistant prosecutor who lied to a judge and his supervisor about a drunk-driving case that he was assigned was suspended for six months by the state’s highest court.

“When an attorney’s misconduct includes a course of conduct involving dishonesty—and especially when the dishonesty includes making misrepresentations to a court—we generally impose an actual suspension,” the Ohio Supreme Court’s March 17 opinion said.

Anthony Perin Spinazze was working as a prosecutor in Sylvania, Ohio, in 2017 when police arrested a man for operating a vehicle under the influence.

The arresting officer objected when the man’s attorney suggested his client would plead guilty to a reduced charge of having physical control of a vehicle while under the influence, a first-degree misdemeanor, the court said.

But Spinazze went ahead with the plea agreement, it said. After the local judge, who knew the man had two prior alcohol-related convictions, heard about the deal, he asked Spinazze to explain his decision, the court said.

Spinazze “misled the court,” the supreme court said. He said the city had some evidence concerns and that the arresting officers had agreed to the deal when they hadn’t, the court said.

Spinazze also misled his supervisor when she initially confronted him about the deal, it said. When she confronted him again, however, he admitted that the arresting officer didn’t want the plea, after which he was placed on unpaid leave and was ultimately fired.

Spinazze’s misconduct and Ohio case law supports an actual suspension in this case, the court said.

He acted with a dishonest motive, it said. But there were mitigating factors including his clean disciplinary record, his cooperation during the the disciplinary proceedings, and evidence of positive character and reputation, the court added.

However, he hasn’t demonstrated that the circumstances here “warrant anything less than an actual suspension from the practice of law,” it said.

Spinazze started with making multiple false statements to a court and then provided false excuses to his supervisor, the court said.

His conduct also “prejudiced the administration of justice because a judge relied on Spinazze’s misrepresentations in accepting a plea, which the court was later forced to vacate after the discovery of Spinazze’s misconduct,” it said.

The case is DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. SPINAZZE., 2020 BL 97577, Ohio, No. 2019-1075, 3/17/20.