For attorneys, the standard of conduct extends far beyond the confines of the courtroom or the client conference room. A lawyer’s personal behavior is constantly scrutinized, as any criminal act can be interpreted as reflecting adversely on their fitness to practice law.

The case of Indiana attorney Cherie Ramage is a recent and powerful reminder that repeat criminal offenses—even those unrelated to client representation—can lead to immediate and substantial professional discipline. Her conviction for a felony Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated (OWI) offense resulted in an immediate interim suspension and a subsequent active suspension, sending a clear message about the non-negotiable standards of the Indiana Bar.

The Underlying Criminal Conduct

The disciplinary proceedings against Cherie Ramage, finalized by the Indiana Supreme Court in April 2025, were driven by her serious criminal history:

1. The Felony Conviction

In June 2024, Ramage pleaded guilty to Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated (OWI), which was charged as a Level 6 felony under Indiana law. The elevated nature of the charge was due to an aggravating factor, likely a prior OWI offense.

2. The Pattern of Misconduct

The severity of the discipline was significantly influenced by the fact that this was not an isolated incident. Ramage had a previous misdemeanor OWI conviction in 2021. A pattern of behavior that shows a disregard for the law is weighed heavily against an attorney.

3. Failure to Self-Report

A separate violation of professional conduct occurred when Ramage failed to report her current OWI conviction to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. Attorneys are professionally obligated to notify the disciplinary authority when convicted of certain crimes, and failing to do so constitutes an additional breach of their duties.

The Disciplinary Verdict

Following notice of the felony conviction, the Indiana Supreme Court immediately placed Ramage under an interim suspension in November 2024, a standard action for attorneys convicted of serious crimes.

The final discipline was set via a Conditional Agreement between Ramage and the Disciplinary Commission, which the Supreme Court approved:

• Violation: The parties stipulated that Ramage violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(b), which prohibits a lawyer from committing a criminal act that “reflects adversely on the lawyer’s trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.”
• Suspension: Ramage was suspended from the practice of law for 60 days, with 30 days actively served. This meant a mandated, immediate loss of the right to practice for one month.
• Probation and Monitoring: The remaining 30 days were stayed (deferred), contingent upon her successful completion of a two-year period of probation. Critically, this probation included continued monitoring by the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (JLAP), emphasizing the court’s focus on recovery and public protection.

The terms of the probation require strict compliance, including signing all necessary authorizations for JLAP monitoring. A violation of any probation term could result in the automatic vacation of the stay, forcing her to serve the remaining 30 days of active suspension.

Conclusion: Fitness and Public Trust

The disciplinary action against Cherie Ramage illustrates a core tenet of legal ethics: the privilege to practice law requires continuous demonstration of personal integrity and respect for the law. While Ramage’s crimes were not directly tied to client funds or courtroom dishonesty, the court found that repeated felony-level OWI convictions reflect a profound lack of respect for legal obligations and public safety.

By ordering an active suspension and mandatory, supervised probation through JLAP, the Indiana Supreme Court sent a strong, dual message: severe professional consequences will follow criminal behavior, and the path back to good standing is conditional upon sustained commitment to health, sobriety, and compliance.