||Respondent engaged in sexual contact with an inmate at a county prison. Respondent used her status as an attorney to obtain a visit with the prisoner. In addition, Respondent made false statements in her Answer to the Petition for Discipline and in her verified response to her request for position in the matter. Respondentís misrepresentations were material because they were intended to mislead the disciplinary system as to her motives and proclivity for engaging in sexual activity with the prisoner and for lying about her behavior at the prison. The Board found the false answers to be aggravating circumstances. The Board was very troubled by Respondentís lack of veracity throughout the investigation and prosecution and noted that this behavior reflected as much on Respondentís fitness to practice law as did her misconduct at the prison.
Although the Hearing Committee had recommended that Respondent be suspended for one hundred and twenty days, the Disciplinary Board recommended that Respondent receive a public censure.
After reviewing the Disciplinary Board Report, Respondentís Petition for Review and Exceptions and Objections and Office of Disciplinary Counselís response thereto, the Supreme Court suspended Respondent for ninety days.