GERALD V. ROBERTS V. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TO BE PUBLISHED
Qsuprsms
(mart
2007-SC-000862-KB
LA-0%
MOVANT
GERALD V. ROBERTS
V.
IN SUPREME COURT
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
RESPONDENT
OPINION AND ORDER
The Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) charged Movant, Gerald V. Roberts,
KBA Member No. 58940, with violating SCR 3.130-8 .3(b) by engaging in
professional misconduct . Roberts now moves this Court to sanction him by
public reprimand. The KBA has no objection .
KBA FILE NO. 11943
SCR 3.130-8 .3(b) provides that "it is professional misconduct for a lawyer
to commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects" .
On June 22, 2004, Roberts was arrested and charged with indecent
exposure in the second degree, a Class B misdemeanor . See KRS ยง 510-150 .
Roberts eventually entered an Alford plea to that charge . See North Carolina v.
Alford, 400 U.S . 25, 91 S. Ct . 160, 27 L. Ed. 2d 162 (1970) . Because the Alford
plea constitutes a conviction, Roberts's conduct was clearly a "criminal act" within
the meaning of SCR 3.130-8 .3(b) .
In its response to the motion, the KBA stated it has no objection to
Roberts being publicly reprimanded for violating SCR 3.130-8 .3(b), in lieu of
being suspended . There are several similar disciplinary cases from the
Commonwealth which convince us that a public reprimand is the appropriate
sanction . See Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Davis , 819 S.W .2d 317 (Ky. 1991) (holding
that an attorney's conviction for harassing communications, a Class B
misdemeanor, warranted a public reprimand) ; Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Colston , 54
S .W.3d 158 (Ky. 2001) (holding that an attorney's misconduct of being convicted
of harassing communications and violating a protective order warranted sanction
of public reprimand and probated six-month suspension) ; Kentucky Bar Ass'n v.
Rankin , 862 S .W .2d 894 (Ky. 1993) (holding that convictions for wanton
endangerment, assault and operating motor vehicle under influence of
intoxicants warranted a public reprimand and a probated six-month suspension) .
Moreover, we find the following mitigating factors relevant in deciding to impose
the public reprimand: 1) absence of a prior disciplinary record and 2) full and free
disclosure to disciplinary board or cooperative attitude toward proceedings .
CONCLUSION
After careful consideration of the facts, this Court orders that Gerald V.
Roberts, KBA Member No. 58940, be issued a public reprimand for professional
misconduct.
Thus, it is ORDERED that:
1.
Gerald V. Roberts is adjudged guilty of violating SCR 3 .130-8.3(b).
2.
He shall therefore receive a public reprimand for his professional
misconduct .
3.
Pursuant to SCR 3 .450, the total costs of these proceedings,
including $47 .08 certified as of November 19, 2007, shall be
assessed against him.
All sitting. All concur.
ENTERED: February 21, 2008 .
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
