Paperwork filed with the Ohio Supreme Court this week states neither Bucio or the court’s Disciplinary Counsel would file objections to the board’s recommendations for action by the Ohio Supreme Court. The court could adopt the recommendation or could impose a more severe or less severe discipline.
»RELATED: Troy attorney admits to committing illegal acts in handling court case
Bucio, 38, was convicted in November of unauthorized use of property involving land obtained for fees from a Shelby County client. He was sentenced in January to five years of community control and a $5,000 fine.
Bucio was accused of taking 22 acres of farm land from the woman in payment for legal representation in 2010, selling the land and keeping the proceeds. The woman was paid restitution just before Bucio’s sentencing.
DOWNLOAD OUR MOBILE APPS FOR LATEST BREAKING NEWS
In a report of its findings and recommendation, the Board of Professional Conduct stated it voted to modify a disciplinary hearing panel recommendation of a two-year suspension from practice of law with one year stayed. The modification was to recommend an indefinite suspension with no petition for reinstatement until Bucio completes successfully or is released from community control ordered in the criminal case.
The judge in the criminal case ordered five years of community control.
The tougher sanction was recommended because of findings that Bucio “did not demonstrate true remorse” for his actions and “the significant financial harm (to the property owner/client), who was required to initiate civil litigation to recover her portion of the sale proceeds and who was not fully repaid by (Bucio) for more than six years, and then only on the eve of his criminal sentencing hearing…”, the board stated.
The court documents state Bucio paid the property owner $97,767 from the property proceeds as part of a settlement agreement. The documents state Bucio acknowledged he earned $9,000 from representing the woman.
He was found in violation of rules of professional conduct including failing to keep the client reasonably informed about the state of the case; failing to respond to client inquiries and canceling multiple meetings she had scheduled; entering into an agreement for property without fully disclosing terms for the acquisition, failing to advise the owner to seek legal counsel and failing to obtain informed consent to agreement terms; and engaging in an illegal act that reflected adversely on his honesty and trustworthiness.
About the Author