The Ohio Supreme Court has suspended Rodger Moore, a Northern Kentucky attorney who appears to have been undone by a love for expensive wines — very expensive wines. Moore reportedly admitted to a series of shoplifting incident of wine. As a wine lover, I always joke that this is an expensive habit and that a heroin addiction would be cheaper. Moore appears to have prove the point.
The Ohio Supreme Court unanimously suspended Moore for two years with one year stayed after finding that he shoplifted wine on seven occasions. He was arrested in 2001 in Atlanta for theft of 12 bottles of wine at an average cost of $12 a bottle. That led to 65 hours of community service.
However, his tastes appear to have become more refined with time — the story of all oenophiles. In March 2011, he was caught shoplifting three bottles of wine, along with olive oil at a Cincinnati grocery store. Rather than shoplifting however he was accused of taking UPC codes for less expensive wine and using them to scan out the bottles at the self-checkout. They must have been pretty pricey because the scan scam reduced the price by $359.10.
Moore reportedly confessed and pled guilty. He was advised by his lawyer to tell the bar everything but was later accused of making false statements and failed to disclose the other thefts.
The opinion below finds violations of DR 1-102(A)(3) (prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude) and 1-102(A)(4) (prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) and that his later conduct violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.1(a) (prohibiting knowingly making a false statement of material fact in connection with a disciplinary matter), 8.4(b) (prohibiting a lawyer from committing an illegal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty or trustworthiness), and 8.4(c) (prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation). The parties also stipulated and the board found that Moore’s conduct violated Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) (now Gov.Bar R. V(9)(G)) (prohibiting a lawyer from neglecting or refusing to assist in a disciplinary investigation).
Here is the opinion: Moore disciplinary decision