Daniel Cornacchione Sr. is a solo practitioner in Caruthersville. He previously has been admonished. In 2022, the chief disciplinary counsel sought to discipline Cornacchione for several alleged violations of the rules of professional conduct. The first pertained to Cornacchione entering an Alford plea (in which a defendant does not admit guilt but agrees the prosecution has enough evidence to convict) to fourth-degree domestic assault. The plea resulted from an incident in which the police were called to Cornacchione’s home because of a dispute with his wife in which he was intoxicated and possessed a loaded firearm. The chief disciplinary counsel also investigated client complaints filed against Cornacchione. The first client hired Cornacchione regarding a probate matter. Once the probate claims were adjudicated, Cornacchione moved to close the estate, but the circuit court overruled the motion, stating it would not close the estate until the client provided receipts or cancelled checks for various payments and two vehicles. Cornacchione took no action in the case for 16 months. The client later discovered Cornacchione had included the wrong vehicle identification numbers in the distribution order, prohibiting the client from retitling the two vehicles. The client filed the ethics complaint after trying to contact Cornacchione for a month with no response. In another matter, a group of clients engaged Cornacchione to resolve a property dispute. Cornacchione entered his appearance only on behalf of one person, did not prepare a retainer agreement or a letter of engagement, and failed to file an answer or responsive pleading in the case for 19 months. During the investigations, the chief disciplinary counsel also audited Cornacchione’s client trust account. The audit showed Cornacchione failed to create and maintain proper ledgers for his trust account, deposited inappropriate funds in his trust account, and made inappropriate payments from his client trust account for office and personal expenses. Cornacchione admitted to commingling personal funds with client funds in the trust account. After a hearing, a disciplinary hearing panel found Cornacchione violated multiple rules of professional conduct. Although recognizing the presumptive discipline was disbarment, the panel recommended Cornacchione be suspended indefinitely with no leave to apply for reinstatement for two years given several mitigating factors, including remorse for his actions and emotional and personal issues at the time of the misconduct. The chief disciplinary counsel accepted the recommendation; Cornacchione rejected it, asserting an admonishment or a reprimand are more appropriate. 

This case presents two questions for the Court – whether Cornacchione violated the rules of professional conduct and, if so, what discipline, if any, is appropriate.