This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 

.




                        DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. ALEXANDER.
          [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Alexander, 

.]
      (No. 2023-0977—Submitted April 16, 2024—Decided April 17, 2024.)
                         ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT.
                                 ____________________
         {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an
application for reinstatement by respondent, Christopher Mark Alexander, Attorney

 last known business address in Mason, Ohio.
         {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of March 14, 2024, and
its order of January 5, 2023, in case No. 2023-0006, In re Alexander, finds that
respondent has complied with these orders and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R.
V(24).
         {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to
the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
         {¶ 4} It is further ordered that pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(12)(A)(3) and
consistent with the opinion rendered herein on March 14, 2024, respondent,
Christopher Mark Alexander, is suspended from the practice of law for a period of
one year with the entire suspension stayed on the conditions that he commit no
further misconduct and remain in compliance with the terms of his (1) court-
ordered community control, (2) substance-abuse-treatment program, including
aftercare, and (3) existing Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program contract. It is further
ordered that if respondent fails to comply with a condition of the stay, the stay will
be lifted and he will serve the full one-year suspension.
         {¶ 5} It is further ordered that the Office of Attorney Services shall not issue
a certificate of good standing to respondent during any period of suspension,
including any stayed period of suspension.
                             SUPREME COURT OF OHIO




       {¶ 6} It is further ordered by the court that within 90 days of the date of this
order, respondent shall reimburse any amounts that have been awarded against
respondent by the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection pursuant to Gov.Bar R.
VIII(7)(F). It is further ordered by the court that if after the date of this order the
Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection awards any amount against respondent
pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F), respondent shall reimburse that amount to the
Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection within 90 days of the notice of such award.
       {¶ 7} It is further ordered that respondent shall keep the clerk and
disciplinary counsel advised of any change of address where respondent may
receive communications.
       {¶ 8} It is further ordered that service shall be deemed made on respondent
by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, to respondent’s last known
address.
       {¶ 9} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies
of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(1) and that publication be
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(2).
       {¶ 10} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Alexander, 

, 

, 

.
       KENNEDY, C.J., and FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART, BRUNNER,
and DETERS, JJ., concur.
                                _________________




                                          2