-
ROBERTS, J., dissenting.
I write separately to dissent because I believe the majority opinion will result in undesirable consequences.
The majority, in requiring that a lawyer must act “with indifference” before violating DR 7-107(B)(5) and (6), has gone too far in my opinion in weighing free speech against a defendant’s right to a fair trial. Under the majority opinion only the most blatant behavior on the part of prosecutors will require disciplinary action.
*137 A prosecutor has, by the very nature of the job, a responsibility to protect the integrity of trials. Therefore, a test that hinges on whether the prosecutor “knows or is bound to know” that his acts “pose a serious and imminent threat to the process” protects both the prosecutor’s freedom of speech and defendants’ right to a fair trial.I respectfully dissent. I join in the separate dissenting opinion of Campbell, J.
Campbell, J., concurs with this dissenting opinion.
Document Info
Docket Number: Bar 81-70; SC 29633
Citation Numbers: 673 P.2d 855, 296 Or. 121, 1983 Ore. LEXIS 1769
Judges: Campbell, Roberts
Filed Date: 12/6/1983
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024