Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MOSES GREEN vs DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND TREASURER, 90-002733 (1990)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 90-002733 Visitors: 64
Petitioner: MOSES GREEN
Respondent: DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND TREASURER
Judges: JAMES E. BRADWELL
Agency: Department of Financial Services
Locations: St. Petersburg, Florida
Filed: May 02, 1990
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Saturday, July 28, 1990.

Latest Update: Jul. 28, 1990
Summary: Whether or not Petitioner's application for examination as a bail bondsman (limited surety agent) should be approved.Whether petitioner failed to divulge criminal charges and disposition and therefore lacks the requisite moral character to qualify as a bail bondsman.
90-2733.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


)

MOSES GREEN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 90-2733

) DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND ) TREASURER, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, James E. Bradwell, held a formal hearing in this case on July 24, 1990, in St. Petersburg, Florida.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: No appearance 1/


For Respondent: Gordon Thomas Nicol, Esquire

Division of Legal Services

412 Larson Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether or not Petitioner's application for examination as a bail bondsman (limited surety agent) should be approved.


PRELIMINARY STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND


By letter dated March 19, 1990, Respondent advised Petitioner, Moses Green, that his application for examination as bail bondsman was denied because he failed to divulge four criminal charges and dispositions thereof on his application for examination and that he thereby failed to demonstrate that he had the requisite high character and approved integrity that is required to qualify as a bail bondsman. Respondent advised Petitioner of his right to contest that denial by requesting a formal hearing. Petitioner thereafter timely requested a formal hearing and on May 2, 1990, this case was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for the assignment of a hearing officer to conduct a formal hearing. On June 11, 1990, this matter was noticed for hearing for July 24, 1990 and was heard as scheduled. At the hearing Respondent introduced exhibits 1 through 5 which were received in evidence at the hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. On April 26, 1989, Petitioner filed two applications for examination as a bail bondsman.


  2. Question 8 on the application inquires of the applicant as follows:


    Have you ever been charged with or convicted of or pleaded guilty or no contest to a crime

    involving moral turpitude, a felony, or a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the laws of any state, territory or country, whether or not a judgment or conviction has been entered? If yes, give date(s):


    1. What was the crime?


    2. Where and when were you charged?


    3. Did you plead guilty or nolo contendere?


    4. Were you convicted?


    5. Was adjudication withheld?


    6. Please provide a brief description of the nature of the offense charge: If there has been more than one such felony charge, provide

      an explanation as to each charge as an attachment. Certified copies of the information or indictment and final adjudication for each charge is required.


  3. On the first application, Petitioner responded N/A indicating not applicable to the inquiries listed in question 8 of the application for examination as bail bondsman. On a second application, Petitioner first listed not applicable to each inquiry and thereafter changed his responses to no, none and corrected each response by initiating each response where no was changed to none. This indicated that Petitioner reviewed his responses to the inquiries.


  4. Respondent introduced certified copies of court records involving Petitioner. A review of those records revealed the following criminal charges and dispositions:


    1. On or about July 27, 1960, Petitioner was charged with issuing a worthless check (Case No. 41684), a felony. On or about September 18, 1960 Petitioner was adjudicated guilty of issuance of a worthless check.


    2. On or about June 18, 1979, Petitioner was charged with false imprisonment (Case No. CRC7903814CFAN0), a felony. On or about October 10, 1979, Petitioner was found not guilty.

    3. On or about June 18, 1979, Petitioner was charged with battery (Case No. CTC7906981MMAN0), a crime involving moral turpitude. On or about

      November 13, 1979, Petitioner was found not guilty.


    4. On or about June 18, 1979, Petitioner was charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor (Case No. CTC7906982MMAN0), a crime involving moral turpitude. On or about September 14, 1979 Petitioner was adjudged guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.


  5. Petitioner failed to divulge the above charges and dispositions thereof on his applications for examination as bail bondsman (limited surety agent) which were submitted to Respondent.


  6. Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing to demonstrate in any affirmative manner, that he is qualified for licensure as a bail bondsman. Petitioner also failed to demonstrate that he is a person of high character and approved integrity and has not been convicted of or pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony, a crime involving moral turpitude or a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the laws of Florida. In addition, Petitioner failed to demonstrate that since the occurrences of the foregoing charges and adjudications, he has rehabilitated his character such that he is presently qualified for licensure as a bail bondsman (limited surety agent).


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


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


  8. The parties were duly noticed pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.


  9. The authority of the Respondent is derived from Chapter 648, Florida Statutes.


  10. Subsection 648.34(2)(f), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part:


    To qualify as a bail bondsman, it must affirmatively appear at the time of application and throughout the period of licensure that: . . .

    (f) the applicant is a person of high character and approved integrity and has not been convicted of or pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony, a crime involving moral turpitude, or a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the laws of any state, the territory or country, whether or not a judgment or conviction has been entered.

  11. Subsection 648.45(2)(a),(b),(e), and (k), Florida Statutes provides in pertinent part that:


    The Department shall deny . . . the eligibility

    of any person to hold a license under this Chapter or the insurance code, for any violations of the laws of this state relating to bail or any violation of the insurance code or for any of the following causes . . . (a) lack of one or more of the qualifications specified in this chapter for a license or permit: . . . (b) material misstatement, misrepresentation, or fraud in obtaining a license or permit, or in attempting to obtain a license

    or permit . . . (e) demonstrated lack of fitness or trustworthiness to engage in the bail bond business: . . . (k) having been found guilty of, or having pleaded guilty to or no contest to a felony, a crime involving moral turpitude, or a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the laws of any state, territory, or country, whether or not a judgement or conviction has been entered.


  12. Respondent established, by clear and convincing evidence, that Petitioner was charged with two felonies and two crimes involving moral turpitude and failed to divulge those charges and dispositions thereof on his application for examination as bail bondsman (limited surety agent) as required. Petitioner failed to affirmatively establish that he qualifies for examination as a bail bondsman (limited surety agent).


RECOMMENDATION


Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law it is RECOMMENDED:


Respondent enter a final order denying Petitioner's application for examination as bail bondsman (limited surety agent).


DONE and ENTERED this 28th day of August, 1990, in Tallahassee, Florida.



JAMES E. BRADWELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of August, 1990.

ENDNOTES


1/ Respondent was properly noticed by a notice of hearing dated June 11, 1990 but neither he nor a representative on his behalf appeared at the hearing.


Copies furnished to:


Gordon Thomas Nicol, Esquire Division of Legal Services

412 Larson Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300


Moses Green

3948 - 38th Street South

St. Petersburg, Florida 33711


Honorable Tom Gallagher Department of Insurance and

Treasurer

The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300


Don Dowdell, General Counsel Department of Insurance and

Treasurer

The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300


Docket for Case No: 90-002733
Issue Date Proceedings
Jul. 28, 1990 Recommended Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 90-002733
Issue Date Document Summary
Oct. 29, 1990 Agency Final Order
Jul. 28, 1990 Recommended Order Whether petitioner failed to divulge criminal charges and disposition and therefore lacks the requisite moral character to qualify as a bail bondsman.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer