context: Mental impairment is a mitigating factor and may tend to negate the wilful or intentional nature of an attorney's misconduct. Attorney Griev.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.parenthetical: stating that a hearing judge's factual findings with regard to mitigating factors tended to negate any dishonest or fraudulent intent
citation_a.sentence: Comm’n v. Hayes, 367 Md. 504, 789 A.2d 119 (2002) (stating that a hearing judge’s factual findings with regard to mitigating factors tended to negate any dishonest or fraudulent intent); Attorney Griev.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 15 P.3d 1, 7
citation_b.parenthetical: finding no willful or voluntary misconduct in behavior of an attorney with a severe, untreated vitamin B-12 deficiency which impaired his short-term memory and exasperated his depression
citation_b.sentence: Comm’n v. Sheridan, 357 Md. 1, 29, 741 A.2d 1143, 1158 (1999) (noting that the state of mind at the time the [attorney] violated the [disciplinary] rules is important in the context of mitigation); see State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass’n. v. Southern, 15 P.3d 1, 7 (Oklahoma 2000) (finding no willful or voluntary misconduct in behavior of an attorney with a severe, untreated vitamin B-12 deficiency which impaired his short-term memory and exasperated his depression).