|
|
| 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | Search | Upcoming cases |
Public Information Home
Court Suspends ‘Naked Photographer’
2006-0443. Columbus Bar Assn. v. Linnen, 2006-Ohio-5480.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 05-021. Stephen P. Linnen, Attorney Registration No. 0071290, is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-5480.pdf
(Oct. 25, 2006) Rejecting his claim of sexual addiction as a defense, the Supreme Court of Ohio today indefinitely suspended the law license of Columbus attorney Stephen P. Linnen, who was convicted last year of multiple criminal counts for appearing in the nude on multiple occasions, accosting Columbus-area women and photographing their startled reactions. The series of crimes remained unsolved for several months, and the Columbus media dubbed Linnen the “naked photographer.”
In a unanimous per curiam opinion, the Court accepted the findings and recommendations of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline that Linnen was guilty of multiple violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility arising from his criminal convictions for public indecency, sexual imposition and aggravated trespass, and that the appropriate sanction for his misconduct is an indefinite suspension of his law license.
Linnen will not be eligible to apply for reinstatement as a licensed attorney in Ohio for two years. As a condition of his reinstatement, the Court ordered that he must submit “an independent and qualified healthcare professional's evaluation of his mental health and the propriety of his reinstatement.”
In a September 2004 plea agreement with Franklin County prosecutors, Linnen admitted that he was the person identified by Columbus news media as “the naked photographer,” and was responsible for 38 separate incidents in which women in public and private locations across Central Ohio were confronted by a man wearing only athletic shoes and a knit cap, with a camera pressed to his face, who then took pictures of their reactions upon being confronted by a unclothed male. In several incidents, Linnen admitted that he pinched or otherwise touched victims who did not immediately react to his acts of exposure.
Linnen was convicted of 53 misdemeanors and sentenced to 18 months of work release, a $3,000 fine and court-ordered counseling. In October 2005, his work release sentence was suspended and he was placed on probation for five years.
Following his convictions, the Columbus Bar Association undertook disciplinary proceedings against Linnen that culminated in the board of commissioners' findings that he had committed multiple violations of the state disciplinary rules that prohibit illegal conduct involving moral turpitude and conduct adversely reflecting on an attorney's fitness to practice law.
In recommending an indefinite license suspension as the appropriate sanction, the board noted the mitigating factors that Linnen had no prior disciplinary infractions, cooperated with disciplinary authorities and presented character references. As aggravating factors, the board found that Linnen acted with a motive of self-gratification, engaged in a pattern of misconduct involving multiple acts and multiple victims, and had failed to satisfactorily acknowledge either the wrongfulness of his actions or the psychological trauma he had caused to a number of his victims.
Linnen presented psychiatric testimony regarding his diagnoses of sexual addiction and exhibitionism as mitigating evidence. However, the board found that Linnen's unwillingness to be treated with drugs for these disorders and the high probability of future recidivism or substitutive sexual behavior by persons with these conditions undermined his claims that his conditions were under control and he was able to resume the competent and ethical practice of law.
Attorneys for Linnen argued that, in recommending a sanction, the disciplinary board placed too little emphasis on the role that Linnen's obsessive mental disorders played in his unlawful conduct, and gave too little weight to testimony by his psychotherapist and social worker attesting to his conscientious attendance at 12-step programs and voluntary participation in the Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program (OLAP) since his conviction.
The court today rejected Linen's plea for a more lenient penalty based on his assertion that he has a medically diagnosed sexual addiction that mitigates his culpability for his misconduct.
“…[W]e suspect that respondent sought (a doctor's) diagnosis specifically to raise it as a mitigating factor in defense to inevitable disciplinary and criminal charges and not solely to stop himself from pulling what he thought others might consider an ‘amusing prank,'” the Court wrote.
In addition, the Court emphasized its agreement with the board's finding that in his testimony before the board, Linnen did not adequately recognize the deleterious effects of his crimes on his victims.
“In fact, respondent mentioned his victims' trauma hardly at all,” the Court wrote. “Moreover, his indifference is unmistakable – he failed to even acknowledge the life-altering effects his actions had on the victim who testified before the panel. This conceit and callousness belies any pretense of regret for his victims' suffering, and the panel and board properly so found.”
Contacts
Bradley Frick, 614.297.1000, for
the Columbus Bar Association.
Geoffrey Stern, 614.462.5400, for Stephen Linnen.
Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion released by the Court, but only for those cases considered noteworthy or of great public interest. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of Court opinions. The full text of this and other Court opinions from 1992 to the present are available online from the Reporter of Decisions: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/ROD/newpdf/. In the Full Text search box, enter the eight-digit case number at the top of this summary and click "Submit."