
    642 S.E.2d 735
    In the Matter of Elizabeth H. ROBINSON, Respondent.
    No. 26287.
    Supreme Court of South Carolina.
    Submitted Feb. 5, 2007.
    Decided March 12, 2007.
    Henry B. Richardson, Jr., Disciplinary Counsel, and Joseph P. Turner, Jr., Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of Columbia, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
    Elizabeth H. Robinson, of Lancaster, pro se.
   PER CURIAM.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and respondent have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent pursuant to Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR, in which respondent admits misconduct and agrees to the imposition of an admonition, public reprimand, or definite suspension not to exceed sixty (60) days. We accept the agreement and issue a public reprimand. The facts, as set forth in the agreement, are as follows.

FACTS

On September 1, 2006, respondent was arrested for shoplifting $796 worth of merchandise (a misdemeanor) from a department store. Respondent applied for and was accepted into the Pre-Trial Intervention program on October 31, 2006. Respondent’s charge was dismissed upon her successful completion of all requirements of Pre-Trial Intervention which included 50 hours of community service and 20 hours of counseling.

LAW

Respondent admits that by her misconduct she has violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR: Rule 8.4(a) (it is professional misconduct for lawyer to violate Rules of Professional Conduct); Rule 8.4(b) (it is professional misconduct for lawyer to commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects); Rule 8.4(c) (it is professional misconduct for lawyer to commit a criminal act involving moral turpitude); and Rule 8.4(d) (it is professional misconduct for lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation). Respondent acknowledges that her misconduct constitutes grounds for discipline under the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement, Rule 413, SCACR, specifically Rule 7(a)(1). (it shall be ground for discipline for lawyer to violate Rules of Professional Conduct) and 7(a)(5) (it shall be ground for discipline for lawyer to engage in conduct tending to pollute the administration of justice or to bring the legal profession into disrepute or in conduct demonstrating an unfitness to practice law).

CONCLUSION

We find that respondent’s misconduct warrants a public reprimand. Accordingly, we accept the Agreement for Discipline by Consent and publicly reprimand respondent for her misconduct.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur. WALLER, J., not participating.  