STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

JOHN C. HENDERSON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 80-345S

) SECRETARY OF STATE, DIVISION ) OF LICENSING, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, this cause was heard by Linda M. Rigot, the assigned Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings, on May 9, 1980, in Miami, Florida.

The Petitioner, John C. Henderson, represented himself. W. J. Gladwin, Jr., Esquire, Tallahassee, Florida, appeared on behalf of the Respondent, Secretary of State, Division of Licensing.

Petitioner timely requested a hearing on the Respondent's denial of his application for a Class "F" Unarmed Security Guard License. Respondent's denial wad based upon Petitioner's conviction of a crime involving dishonest dealings, conviction of a felony in this or any other state where civil rights have not been restored, and failure to meet character qualifications. The issue to be determined is whether Petitioner's application for licensure should be approved.

The parties stipulated to the admission into evidence of a copy of Petitioner's application for an unarmed guard license. The Petitioner testified on his own behalf and presented the testimony of Betty Barrett (his parole officer), Anne Henderson (his wife of one year), and Henry Martin (his current employer).

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Question 13 on Petitioner's application for an unarmed guard license reads as follows: "Have you ever been arrested". In response thereto, Petitioner answered in the affirmative and, in accordance with the instructions to list all arrests, stated that he had been arrested for breaking and entering in 1965, at which time he served one year in prison; and that he had been arrested for armed robbery in 1969, at which time he was sentenced to five to ten years in prison. No other arrests were listed. Petitioner's application was signed under oath and recited that all information contained in the application was true and correct.

   
   

2. Petitioner is presently on probation from his armed robbery conviction, and his probationary period will not expire until March 4, 1981. His civil rights have not been restored from that conviction, although he intends to apply for restoration upon completion of his parole period.

3. At the time that the Petitioner's employer was assisting him in completing his application, Petitioner indicated to Mr. Martin that Petitioner had been arrested and convicted of offenses in addition to those revealed on his application. Those omitted arrests and/or convictions include fighting and unlawful assembly in 1962; assault with a knife in 1964; buying, receiving and concealing stolen property in 1966; assault and battery in 1968; and prison breach in 1974.

   
   

4. Although Petitioner's parole officer believes he is being rehabilitated, Ms. Barrett, in the two and one-half years she has known Petitioner, only speaks to him on the telephone once a month and sees him every two months. More importantly, Ms. Barrett is unable to state that she would hire Petitioner as a security guard at her home.

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

5. Section 493.08(2), Florida Statutes (1979), sets forth specific grounds for denial of licensure, and Respondent relied upon three of the statutory grounds in denying Petitioner's application for licensure. Competent, substantial evidence was presented, primarily through Petitioner's own testimony, to support denial of Petitioner's application on the grounds relied upon by the Respondent herein, to wit: conviction of a felony where civil rights have not been restored, conviction of a crime involving dishonest dealings, and failure to meet character qualifications.

   
   

6. Petitioner was unable to offer any extenuating or mitigating circumstances to justify exempting him from the statutory bases for denial. Moreover, his own probation officer was unable to recommend him for a position such as that sought by Petitioner. Petitioner's other character witnesses, his employer and his new wife, did testify that Petitioner was honest and reliable over the short period of time that they had known him; however, his lack of honesty is more clearly revealed by his false answer to Question 13 in his application, which false answer was made during the same time period and which answer was known to his employer to be false.

   
   

7. Although falsification of his application for licensure was not one of the grounds relied upon by the Respondent in denying Petitioner's application [Section 493.08(2)(f)], the undersigned would be remiss in her duties to ignore the acknowledged fact that Petitioner answered Question 13 falsely, particularly in view of the fact that Petitioner testified at the hearing that he "forgot" to include all of his arrests and convictions, while Petitioner's employer testified at the hearing that Petitioner acknowledged to him when he completed the application that he had not included a complete listing.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED THAT:

A final order be entered denying Petitioner's application for a Class "F" Unarmed Guard License.

RECOMMENDED this 20th day of June, 1980, in Tallahassee, Florida.

LINDA M. RIGOT, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Mr. John C. Henderson

1771 North East 176th Street North Miami Beach, Florida 33162

W. J. Gladwin, Jr., Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of State

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Mr. Don Hazelton, Director Division of Licensing Department of State

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

The Honorable George Firestone Secretary of State

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Docket for Case No: 80-000345

Orders for Case No: 80-000345