STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND ) TRAINING COMMISSION, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 87-4661

)

CHARLES H. WARDLOW, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, James E. Bradwell, held a public hearing in this case on February 23, 1988 in Miami, Florida. The parties requested and were afforded leave through May 9, 1988, to submit proposed memoranda supportive of their respective positions. Petitioner's proposed findings were incorporated herein.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Joseph S. White,

Assistant General Counsel

Florida Department of Law Enforcement Criminal Justice Standards and

Training Commission Post Office Box 1489

Tallahassee, Florida 32302

For Respondent: Charles H. Wardlow, pro se

12820 North West 17th Avenue Miami, Florida 33167

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue is whether or not Respondent's Law Enforcement Officer Certification should be revoked for alleged conduct which was below the minimum qualifications for law enforcement officers as required in that he failed to maintain good moral character.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Petitioner, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, filed an Amended Administrative Complaint on October 2, 1987, seeking to revoke the law enforcement officer certification of Respondent, Charles H. Wardlow. The complaint alleges that Respondent failed to maintain the qualifications set out under Florida Statutes Section 943.13(7), which requires an officer to have good moral character. The complaint further

alleges that Respondent's certification should be revoked pursuant to Florida Statutes Subsection 943.1395(5). Upon written motion, Petitioner was granted leave to amend the dates of alleged misconduct.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Based on my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor while testifying, documentary evidence received and the entire record compiled herein, I make the following relevant factual findings.

1. The Respondent was certified by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission on January 13, 1973, and was issued Certificate Number 02- 6995.

   
   

2. At all times material to the allegations of the Amended Administrative Complaint, the Respondent maintained a personal checking account at a bank known as Bankers Trust, located in North Charleston, South Carolina under the name Charles H. Wardlow, Jr.

   
   

3. At all times material to the allegations of the Amended Administrative Complaint, the Respondent was employed by Rice Business College in North Charleston, South Carolina as an Admission Representative and Counselor.

   
   

4. On or about July 1980, the Respondent personally assisted Roger G. Clemmons, a U.S. Armed Forces Veteran, in filling out and submitting to the Veterans Administration the appropriate Veterans Administration forms to obtain federal financial assistance in attending Rice Business College as a student.

   
   

5. Roger Clemmons did not attend classes at Rice Business College in 1980 or 1981. Mr. Clemmons did attend Rice Business College beginning in January 1982 but withdrew after the completion of approximately one half of the quarter term which began in January of 1982.

   
   

6. In apparent response to Mr. Clemmons' submission of the forms described in paragraph 4 above, the United States Treasury Department, Fiscal Service Division of Disbursement in Kansas City, Kansas, forwarded four checks payable to the order of Roger G. Clemmons. The checks were mailed to Rice Business College.

7. The checks, numbered 49,762,137; 18,537,709; 18,669,713; and 18,895,582

were drawn on September 19, 1980, December 1, 1980, December 31, 1980, and February 27, 1981 respectively and were in the amounts of $331.73, $327.00,

$218.00, and $342.00 respectively.

1. On December 24, 1980, December 15, 1980, January 5, 1981, and a date in March 1981, respectively, each of the four checks was deposited into the Respondent's personal checking account at Bankers Trust, North Charleston, South Carolina.

   
   

2. Upon deposit in the Respondent's account, each of the four checks bore the endorsement of Roger G. Clemmons, followed by the endorsement of Charles H. Wardlow, Jr.

   
   

3. Roger G. Clemmons did not receive nor deposit any of the four checks prior to their deposit in the Respondent's account. Mr. Clemmons did not endorse his name on any of the four checks nor did he cash any of the checks or

   receive any proceeds from any of the checks. Mr. Clemmons did not give anyone authority or permission to endorse his name on any of the four checks.

   
   

4. On September 6, 1983, the Respondent voluntarily provided handwriting samples to Special Agents Bert J. Steves and Louis R. Cruz of the U.S. Secret Service

   
   

5. On February 17, 1985 Special Agent Thomas J. Smith, an examiner of questioned documents employed by the U.S. Secret Service, examined the Respondent's handwriting samples and compared them with the endorsements on the four checks described herein.

   
   

6. Agent Smith is an expert qualified to give an opinion in the area of handwriting comparison and questioned documents. Agent Smith has been employed as an examiner of handwriting and questioned documents by the U.S. Secret Service for approximately ten years. Prior to this employment, Agent Smith was employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation where he also worked as an examiner of handwriting and questioned documents, for approximately ten years. Agent smith was trained at the Federal Bureau of Investigation laboratory in document and handwriting examination prior to his beginning work with this agency. Agent Smith has been held to be an expert in his field and permitted to give his expert opinion regarding the examination of questioned documents in a total of approximately forty to fifty cases tried in United States district courts and the trial courts of several states including Florida, Alabama, Georgia and California.

   
   

7. Upon Agent Smith's comparison of the Respondent's handwriting samples with the handwriting which appeared in the endorsements on the backs of each of the four checks, Agent Smith concluded that Charles H. Wardlow had written the endorsements on the checks bearing the name Charles H. Wardlow, Jr. Agent Smith was of the opinion that Charles H. Wardlow had also written the endorsement bearing the name Roger G. Clemmons on check number 18,537,709. Agent Smith was of the opinion that Charles H. Wardlow had probably written the endorsement bearing the name Roger G. Clemmons on the remaining three checks.

   
   

8. In August, 1986, four warrants were filed against the Respondent in Charleston County South Carolina on four counts of forgery regarding the four checks described herein. In January 1987, the Respondent entered into a pretrial intervention agreement with the Solicitor's Office in Charleston, South Carolina. The Respondent has since paid, in compliance with the agreement,

   $1,218.73 in restitution to the United States Government.

   
   

9. Special Agent Mark Parkman of the United States Department of the Treasurer, Secret Service Bureau, was assigned the case involving Respondent during August, 1982. Special Agent Parkman was then employed at the Charleston, South Carolina office of the Secret Service. Special Agent Parkman was referred the case from the Department's Check Claims Division.

   
   

10. The investigation involved the total of twenty-two (22) checks from the Veterans Administration (VA) payable to a total of nine payees, including Roger Clemmons, all of which had been forwarded to Rice Business College. Respondent was not a payee on any of the checks. The purpose of the investigation was to ascertain if, and under what circumstances, the checks were negotiated into the Respondent's checking account.

    
    

11. Subsequent investigation by Agent Parkman revealed that the Respondent had since left the Charleston area and relocated in Miami. During the course of

    the investigation, Agent Parkman contacted the Miami Office of the Secret Service and requested that agents make contact with the Respondent. Respondent was interviewed concerning the checks and handwriting exemplars were obtained.

    
    

12. On September 6, 1987, Agents Cruz and Steves interviewed Respondent in Miami at Agent Parkman's request. On this occasion, Respondent denied having committed any forgeries while at Rice Business College. Agents Cruz and Steves forwarded the handwriting samples in a report of the interview to Agent Parkman. Upon receipt of the report and handwriting samples Agent Parkman forwarded the samples as well as the checks to the Secret Service questioned documents laboratory in Washington, D. C. for analysis.

    
    

13. Upon receipt of the laboratory's report, Agent Parkman requested that agents in the Miami office of the Secret Service conduct a second interview of Respondent.

    
    

14. On January 22, 1987, a second interview was conducted in Miami by Agent Laura Bykowski of the Secret Service's Miami office. The Respondent at first denied that he signed any payees' name on the checks in question, but thereafter admitted that it was possible that he had signed the payee's name and endorsed the checks. (TR 39-40).

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

15. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action. Subsection 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

16. The parties were duly noticed pursuant to notice provision of Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.

    
    

17. The authority of the Petitioner is derived from Chapter 943, Florida Statutes.

    
    

18. Respondent, a certified law enforcement officer, is subject to the disciplinary guides of Chapter 943, Florida Statutes.

    
    

19. Section 943.13, Florida Statutes establishes the minimum qualifications for law enforcement officers in Florida, which include at Subsection seven (7):

    
    

    Have a good moral character as determined by a background investigation under procedures established by the commission.

    
    

20. Section 943.1395(5) requires:

    
    

    The commission may revoke the certification of any officer who is not in compliance with the provisions of Section 943.13(1)- (10)...

    
    

21. Competent and substantial evidence was offered herein to establish that the Respondent forged the name of payee, Roger Clemmons on four checks made payable to Mr. Clemmons from the Veterans Administration in an aggregate amount

    of $1,218.73. Respondent deposited the checks into his personal checking account and withdrew the funds without the authorization or consent of Mr. Clemmons. This was all done in an effort by Respondent to defraud Mr. Clemmons of obtaining the proceeds of the checks and/or to defraud the government by obtaining government funds to which he was not entitled.

    
    

22. Respondent's act of misconduct as hereinabove described constitute a felonious act, had it been committed in Florida. Subsection 831.01, Florida Statutes. Respondent's misconduct is inconsistent with public expectations of persons in positions of trust and confidence. See Zemour, Inc. v. Division of Beverages, 347 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), a case where the definition of moral character was defined as "not only the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, but the character to observe the difference; the observance of the rules of right conduct, and conduct which indicates and establishes the qualities generally acceptable to the positions of trust and confidence." The position of law enforcement officer is a position of trust and confidence. Additionally, Respondent's misconduct further establishes substantial doubts concerning his honesty and respect for the law.

    
    

23. Based thereon, competent and substantial evidence was offered herein to conclude that Respondent lacks moral character as defined by Section 943.13(7), Florida Statutes and his certification as a law enforcement officer should be revoked as required by Subsection 943.1395(5), Florida Statutes. I shall so recommend.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that:

Respondent's Certification Number 02-6995 as a law enforcement officer be REVOKED.

RECOMMENDED this 13th day of June, 1988, in Tallahassee, Florida.

JAMES E. BRADWELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 13th day of June, 1988.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Joseph S. White, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Charles H. Wardlow

1280 North West 17th Avenue Miami, Florida 33167

Robert R. Dempsey, Executive Director Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Rod Caswell, Director Criminal Justice Standards Training Commission

Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Docket for Case No: 87-004661

Orders for Case No: 87-004661