STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

PAT LA FRATTA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 78-1799

) OFFICE OF TREASURER, INSURANCE ) COMMISSIONER, STATE OF FLORIDA )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice an administrative hearing was held before Delphene C. Strickland, Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings, in Room 1062, 401 NW 2nd Street, Miami, Florida, at 3:30 p.m. on January 9, 1979.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Max P. Engle, Esquire

1461 North West 17th Avenue Miami, Florida 33125

For Respondent: Patrick F. Maroney, Esquire

Office of the Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32304 ISSUE

Whether the Petitioner, Pat LaFratta, is entitled to be licensed as a Bail Bond Runner.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner, Pat LaFratta, applied for a Bail Bond Runner's License, which application was sworn to and subscribed on the 11th day of June, 1978. Petitioner had previously, on July 9, 1976, submitted an application for professional Bail Bondsman. The Respondent, by letter from the Chief of the Bureau of Licensing, Mrs. Onez O'Neal, dated August 31, 1978, informed Mr. LaFratta that his application for Bail Bond Runner's License was denied and stated that "the investigation conducted by this Department reflects that you do not meet the qualifications as set forth in Sections 648.27(2)(4), and 648.34(2)(f), Florida Statutes." The Petitioner requested an administrative hearing.

   
   

2. A deposition of Howard Paul Sabin, who was at the time imprisoned for bribery, was entered into the evidence without objection. The deposition was taken at the Hendry Correctional Institute in Immokalee, Florida, on December

   20, 1978, by counsel for the Respondent after Respondent had denied Petitioner's application for licensure. Counsel for the Petitioner, Herb Fried, Esquire, 1461 NW 17th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33125, and the Petitioner, Pat LaFratta, were present.

   
   

3. Sabin's testimony was that the Petitioner, whom he identified at the taking of the deposition, shared commissions in performing bail bond activities and that Petitioner acquiesced and participated in bribing a police officer. Mr. Sabin testified that Mr. LaFratta used LaFratta's apartment as an office. Telephone calls were made from the apartment to call the jail and speak to people to see if Sabin could help them make bond while only Sabin, not Mr. LaFratta, was licensed. Sabin testified that the name of the agency was AABBEE Bail Bonds and that LaFratta paid Sabin a percentage of bonds solicited by Mr. Sabin and referred to Mr. LaFratta. The time frame Sabin testified about was approximately from September of 1975, to December of 1975. The Petitioner's attorney questioned Sabin about any promises made to him for his testimony and about other bondsmen, but there were no questions or contradictions by Petitioner or his attorney as to testimony concerning the subject of this hearing.

   
   

4. A yellow page from a Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company Directory, dated 1976, was submitted into evidence in which there was an advertisement "Bail Bonds, 24-Hour Service Any Court - State, Federal, Criminal, Narcotic - Pat LaFratta, Manager - AABBEE Bail Bonds" and a telephone number. Also submitted into evidence was a copy of a business card "AABBEE Bail Bonds - Pat LaFratta - 24-Hour Service" with the same telephone number as advertised in the yellow pages of the 1976 telephone directory.

   
   

5. It is obvious upon examination that the telephone advertisement and card were advising the public using the directory that Petitioner LaFratta was in the bail bond business. Petitioner was not then licensed.

   
   

6. On the application for Bail Bond Runner's License of June 11, 1978, Question 14: "Have you ever been charged with or convicted of a felony?" was answered "Yes." The remainder of the question stated: "If so, complete the following and submit a full and detailed report on a separate sheet." This was answered: "1970 - Broward Cty. Ct. - Ft. Lauderdale, Fl. - Poss. Stolen Prop. -

   23 counts, 1 yr. cty. jail 2-5 yrs. probation conc."

   
   

7. Petitioner listed no other charges or convictions on the application or on a separate sheet.

   
   

8. Respondent submitted in defense of its denial a number of exhibits which were entered into evidence as follows:

Exhibit 3(a) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated October 20, 1969. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi, and the Judge released Petitioner from custody.

Exhibit 3(b) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated October 23, 1967. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi. Petitioner was released from custody.

Exhibit 3(c) concerns the offense of auto theft and is dated April 4, 1969. The solicitor announced "No Information," and the Respondent was released from custody.

Exhibit 3(d) concerns the offense of uttering a forged instrument and is dated June 30, 1971. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi, and the Judge released Petitioner from custody.

Exhibit 3(e) concerns the offense of two counts of receiving stolen property and is dated April 5, 1971. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi. The Judge released the Petitioner from custody.

Exhibit 3(f) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated January 22, 1969. Petitioner was acquitted by a jury and released from custody.

Exhibit 3(g) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated April 5, 1971. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi, and the Judge released Petitioner from custody.

Exhibit 3(h) concerns the offense of receiving or aiding in the concealment of parts of a 1968 Chevrolet Impala and is dated October 31, 1969. The State was allowed 30 days to amend because of the vagueness of the charge.

Exhibit 3(i) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated April 5, 1971. The solicitor announced a Nolle Prosequi, and the Judge released Petitioner from custody.

Exhibit 3(j) concerns the offense of aggravated assault and is dated October 27, 1967. The Hearing Officer finds that Petitioner was not the defendant in said case.

Exhibit 3(k) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated December 13, 1968. Petitioner was acquitted by a jury and released from custody.

Exhibit 3(l) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property arid is dated October 1, 1969. The Petitioner was acquitted by the court and released from custody.

Exhibit 3(m) concerns the offense of receiving stolen property and is dated June 25, 1968. The Petitioner was acquitted by the court arid released from custody.

Exhibit 3(n) concerns the offense of assault and battery, a misdemeanor, and is dated October 30, 1967.

Exhibit 3(o) is a judgment and sentence for the crime of receiving stolen property and is dated October 5, 1971. Petitioner was placed on probation for five years.

Exhibit (p) is a judgment and sentence dated April 5, 1971.

Petitioner was sentenced to one year in prison and an assessment.

Exhibit 3(q) concerns the violation of parole.

1. Respondent's Exhibit 3(e), (g), (i), (o), and (p), supra, are part of a 23-count information which was submitted as Petitioner's Exhibit #6 in Case No. 70-25492, an information for Receiving Stolen property.

2. Respondent's Exhibit 3(a), (b), (c), (d), (f), (h), (k), (l), and (m), supra, refer to felony charges of receiving stolen property, uttering a forged instrument and auto theft, which were not listed on the Petitioner's application and were not part of the 23-count information, which information concerned receiving stolen property.

   
   

3. Exhibit 3(a), (b), (f), (k), (l), and (m), supra, concern stolen property preceding the dates of the offenses mentioned in the 23-count information.

   
   

4. The failure to list the foregoing felony charges shows the Petitioner made material misstatements on his application.

   
   

5. Petitioner LaFratta testified that he sent a package regarding the 23 counts mentioned in Findings of Fact No. 3, supra, with both application for Professional Bail Bondsman and for subject license to the Respondent. His testimony was not backed by evidence that he in fact sent the materials to the Respondent, which were required to have been sent at the time the application was made and listed on his application. His testimony that he had requested the clerk to "make out a whole booklet on everything that pertains to me," if true, was not adequate to truthfully answer Question 14, Findings of Fact No. 3, supra. The Hearing Officer finds that Petitioner did not furnished a full and detailed report and information as required by Question 14. It is the finding of the Hearing Officer that Petitioner did not intend to furnish the required information.

   
   

6. Petitioner testified that he did not think that he had ever been arrested for assault, but the Respondent presented evidence showing that Petitioner had in fact been arrested for assault and battery.

   
   

7. On subject application the Petitioner also failed to fully answer the question as to his employment history for the past five years. He failed to disclose that he had worked for Abel Bail Bonds.

   
   

8. On the question as to his residence for the past five years, Mr. LaFratta failed to show that he had been incarcerated at Florida State Prison during that period of time.

   
   

9. The herein mentioned 23-count information and the Restoration of Civil Rights were certified in June of 1976, and application for Professional Bail Bondsman was submitted in July of 1976. It is the finding of this Hearing Officer that these instruments were the only information submitted by the Petitioner to the Respondent as to his charges and convictions, despite his testimony.

   
   

10. The certificate of Restoration of Civil Rights to Pat LaFratta, dated June 8, 1976, was previous to the application for Bail Bond Runner's License sworn to and subscribed by the Petitioner on June 11, 1978, and to the application for Bail Bondsman sworn to and subscribed by the Petitioner on July 9, 1976.

    
    

11. The certificate of Restoration of Civil Rights is dated June 8, 1976, and within a few weeks thereafter Petitioner failed to truthfully answer questions under oath on his application on July 9, 1976, and failed to fully and truthfully answer the question on his application for Bail Bond Runner's License of July 11, 1978.

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

12. Section 648.45 Denial, suspension, refusal to renew, or revocation of license or eligibility to hold same.-- provides:

    
    

    1. The department may deny, suspend, revoke or refuse to renew any license issued under this law, or it may suspend or revoke the eligibility of any person to hold a license under this law, for any of the following causes or for any violation of the laws of this state relating to bail:

       (c) Material misstatement, misrepresentation or fraud in obtaining the license, or failure to pass any examination required under this chapter.

       (e) Conviction of a felony.

       
       

13. Petitioner violated the foregoing statute by his incomplete and misleading answers to Questions 9, 11, and 14 on his application. He has been convicted of a felony.

    
    

14. Section 648.27 Licenses; general.-- provides:

    
    

    (2) For the protection of the people of this state, the department shall not issue, renew, or permit to exist any license except in compliance with this chapter. The department shall not issue, renew, or permit to exist a license for any individual found to be untrustworthy or incompetent who has had his eligibility to hold a license revoked, or who has not established to the satisfaction of the department that he is qualified therefor in accordance with this chapter.

    
    

15. Petitioner has shown himself to be untrustworthy, a violation of the foregoing statute.

    
    

16. Section 648.27 further provides:

    
    

    (4) If upon the basis of the completed application for a license and such further inquiry or investigation the department deems the applicant to be unfit as to character and background or lacking in one or more of the required qualifications for the license, the department shall disapprove the application and notify the applicant thereof, stating the grounds for disapproval.

    
    

17. Petitioner has shown himself to be unfit as to character and background and lacking the qualifications for licensure.

RECOMMENDATION

Reject the application of Petitioner, Pat LaFratta, for a license as a Ball Bond Runner.

DONE and ORDERED this 29th day of March, 1979, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of March, 1979.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Patrick F. Maroney, Esquire Florida Department of Insurance Legal Division

428-A Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Max P. Engel, Esquire

1461 North West 17th Avenue Miami, Florida 33125

Docket for Case No: 78-001799

Orders for Case No: 78-001799