STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS ) AND TRAINING COMMISSION, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 94-5306
)
VINCE CAMPBELL, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Notice was provided; and on September 14, 1995, a formal hearing was held in this case, pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. The hearing location was the Grace Knight Conference Room, Second Floor, Alachua County Administration Building, Gainesville, Florida. Charles C. Adams was the hearing officer.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Paul D. Johnston, Esquire
Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1489
For Respondent: Joseph W. Little, Esquire
3731 Northwest 13th Place Gainesville, Florida 32605
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
In this case, the Petitioner seeks to impose discipline against the Respondent's certificate to be employed as a correctional officer based upon the allegation that the Respondent has committed acts which evidence a failure to maintain the qualifications incumbent upon a correctional officer working in Florida. In particular, it is alleged that the Respondent committed acts which demonstrated a lack of good moral character.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
On February 24, 1992, the Petitioner brought an Administrative Complaint against the Respondent in Case No.
C-1896 alleging that:
2.(a) On or about August 2, 1989, the Respondent, Vince Campbell, did then unlawfully resist, obstruct or oppose Officer Lisa D. Brown of the Alachua Police
Department in the lawful execution of her legal duty without offering or doing violence to the person of said officer.
On or about May 5, 1990, the Respondent, Vince Campbell, did then unlawfully resist, obstruct or oppose Sheriff Jerry Whitehead of the Union County Sheriff's Office, in the lawful execution of his legal duty without offering or doing violence to the person of said officer.
On or about August 16, 1991, the Respondent, Vince Campbell, did then unlawfully become intoxicated and endangered the safety of another person or property.
Upon a motion, the August 16, 1991 date was corrected to read "August 6, 1991" related to (c).
For these reasons Respondent was accused of violating the provisions of Section 943.1395(5) and (6), Florida Statutes, and Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(b) and/or (c), Florida Administrative Code, by failing to maintain qualifications established in Section 943.13(7), Florida Statutes, which require that a correctional officer in Florida have good moral character.
The Administrative Complaint was served on February 24, 1992.
On March 16, 1992, the Respondent elected to proceed to a Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, hearing to contest the factual allegations in the complaint.
On September 22, 1994, the case was transmitted to the Division of Administrative Hearings for assignment of a hearing officer to conduct the formal hearing. The undersigned hearing officer was assigned to the case.
The hearing was scheduled to be heard on January 9, 1995 and was continued upon the joint motion by the parties. The case was rescheduled for a hearing to be held on July 11, 1995. The Respondent again moved to continue the hearing.
The further motion to continue was unopposed by the Petitioner. The case was rescheduled for September 14, 1995, the date upon which it was heard.
Respondent's motion to dismiss the case for Petitioner's failure to provide his counsel with a copy of the complaint was denied.
The Petitioner moved to have deemed admitted certain requests for admissions. The Respondent did not reply to the motion. An order was entered on November 22, 1994, which granted the motion to have deemed admitted certain requests for admissions.
At hearing, the Petitioner presented as witnesses Sheriff Jerry Whitehead; Officer Lisa Haefner, formerly Lisa Brown; Sergeant Cindy Dennison; former Sergeant Clovis Watson, Jr.; Officer Glenn Hammond; and Officer Donald Wallace. The Petitioner's Exhibits 1-3 were admitted into evidence. The Respondent testified on his own behalf and did not present any exhibits.
A hearing transcript was filed on October 5, 1995.
The parties filed proposed recommended orders which have been considered.
The fact proposals by Petitioner are discussed in the Appendix to the
recommended order. Respondent has described a provision within his proposed recommended order as "fact finding"; however, this section constitutes legal argument and not fact finding.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Facts Deemed Admitted
The Respondent was certified as a corrections officer by the Petitioner on or about August 16, 1985 and was issued Corrections Certificate No. 28-85- 502-02.
The Respondent was employed as a sworn corrections officer with the Alachua County Department of Corrections from June 17, 1985 to August 8, 1991.
The Respondent, on or about April 20, 1990, was found guilty by a jury for the crime of resisting arrest without violence, a misdemeanor. The court withheld adjudication and sentenced the Respondent to six months of probation.
The Respondent, on or about July 8, 1991, entered a plea of nolo contendere to the criminal charges of resisting arrest without violence and battery, both misdemeanors. The court sentenced the Respondent to one year of probation and withheld adjudication.
On or about August 6, 1991, the Respondent became involved in a dispute with members of his family at his residence.
The Respondent had consumed one or more alcoholic beverages immediately prior to and/or during the above-referenced family dispute.
The dispute turned into a verbal and physical disturbance involving the Respondent and members of his family.
The police were called to the Respondent's residence due to the above- referenced disturbance.
After the police arrived with regard to the above-referenced disturbance, the Respondent barricaded himself inside his residence by locking the doors.
After barricading himself inside his residence, the Respondent armed himself with a knife.
The Respondent threatened to kill the police officers at the scene of the above-referenced disturbance if the officers attempted to apprehend him.
Other Facts
The offense described in paragraph 3 to these facts is related to the allegations contained in paragraph 2.(a) to the Administrative Complaint.
The offense described in paragraph 4 to these facts is related to the allegations contained in paragraph 2.(b) to the Administrative Complaint, with the exception that paragraph 2.(b) makes no mention that a battery was committed.
The offense described in paragraph 4 to these facts was considered in the Circuit Court of Union County, Florida, Case No. 90-29-CF. In addition to the service of one year of probation, the Respondent was ordered to successfully complete Anger Management as instructed by the Respondent's probation officer.
On August 2, 1989, at approximately 9:30 p.m., in Alachua, Florida, Officer Lisa Brown, in pursuing her duties as a sworn officer, stopped the Respondent for a traffic violation. The Respondent was stopped because he had run two stop signs in Alachua. The stop signs were run at Northeast 8th Avenue crossing over State Road 235 and at Northwest 8th Avenue at Main Street.
Officer Brown is now Officer Lisa Brown Haefner.
At times relevant, Officer Haefner was serving as a police officer with the City of Alachua.
Officer Haefner made the traffic-violation stop on Northwest 8th Avenue, off of Main Street, in Alachua.
When the traffic-violation stop was made, Officer Haefner was assisted by Sergeant Cindy Dennison of the City of Alachua.
Sergeant Dennison and Officer Haefner were driving separate patrol units on that night. Both officers observed the Respondent run the stop signs.
Officer Haefner and Sergeant Dennison did not know Respondent when the traffic stop was made.
After the stop, Officer Haefner asked the Respondent to exit his vehicle. The Respondent exited the vehicle. At that time, Officer Haefner asked the Respondent for identification. The Respondent replied that he "had none". Officer Haefner asked the Respondent for his name. The Respondent stated that he "didn't have a name". When the Respondent was contacted about the traffic violations, Officer Haefner asked for his driver's license, and the Respondent told Officer Haefner that he did not have a driver's license.
The Respondent was acting irrational and irritated in the presence of Sergeant Dennison and Officer Haefner.
Officer Haefner detected an odor about Respondent's person which she believed to be cannabis.
Officer Haefner determined to arrest the Respondent for resisting or obstructing arrest without violence based upon the Respondent's failure to give information concerning his identity and the belief that she had cause to arrest Respondent.
After informing the Respondent that he was being arrested for resisting or obstructing arrest without violence, Officer Haefner and Sergeant Dennison attempted to place handcuffs on the Respondent. This was a normal procedure.
The Respondent resisted the placement of the handcuffs by twisting and stiffening his body and leaving his arms in front of him, which obstructed the officers' ability to secure the Respondent's arms behind him, as they desired.
Under the circumstances, Officer Haefner sought the assistance of Officer Clovis Watson, Jr. (later Sergeant Watson) and Officer VanHorn.
The other officers who were summoned for assistance were employed by the City of Alachua Police Department.
The Respondent was eventually handcuffed, placed in Officer Watson's patrol car, and taken to the police station. When at the police station, he continued to be irrational and irritated.
At one point in the encounter between Officer Haefner, Sergeant Dennison, and the Respondent, the Respondent offered to obtain identification from the back seat of his vehicle. The officers declined that request in that the Respondent was acting irrational and irritated; and based upon a fear for her personal safety, Officer Haefner would not allow the Respondent to access his vehicle. Respondent's offer to obtain identification came about at the point in time at which Officer Haefner and Sergeant Dennison attempted to handcuff the Respondent.
The nature of the Respondent's irrationality and irritability was manifested by his being "real vocal, not wanting to cooperate, agitated as far as being stopped" and asking the officers "why are you harassing me?". The Respondent manifested this attitude notwithstanding that Officer Haefner had told him that he was being stopped for a traffic violation.
The Respondent also manifested his irritability by having an agitated appearance.
Before the Respondent was arrested for resisting or obstructing arrest without violence, he had been told several times not to return to his vehicle; however, he continued to walk toward his vehicle. It is at that point that Officer Haefner and Sergeant Dennison physically grabbed the Respondent and tried to restrain and handcuff him.
The Respondent's actions prohibited Officer Haefner and Sergeant Dennison from performing their law-enforcement duties in making the traffic- violation stop.
The Respondent continued to struggle when the officers were attempting to place the handcuffs on him after Officer Watson arrived at the scene by swaying back and forth. In the course of that struggle, Sergeant Dennison fell to the ground and the Respondent and Officer Watson fell on top of her. As a consequence, Sergeant Dennison sustained a concussion.
The Respondent held his hands close to his body as a means to restrict the ability of the officers to handcuff him. The Respondent shook back and forth and this caused the officers and the Respondent to fall, injuring Sergeant Dennison.
While the officers were attempting to handcuff the Respondent, he did not strike out at the officers.
The Respondent resisted, in part, because he did not wish to be taken to the jail where he worked.
On May 5, 1990, the Respondent, together with his brother and a friend, went to Union County, Florida, to a nightclub. When they arrived they were confronted by a number of persons who were already at the club. A fight ensued and the Respondent's brother was injured.
The Respondent then took his brother to Ramadan Hospital to have his brother treated for injuries sustained in the fight at the club. Ramadan Hospital was located in Lake Butler, Union County, Florida.
Union County Sheriff Jerry Whitehead received a call on his beeper at around 1:00 to 1:30 a.m. on the morning in question. He called the Union County Jail and was told about the fight at the local nightclub. He was also told that all of the deputy sheriffs had been dispatched to the nightclub.
In turn, Sheriff Whitehead got dressed and started toward Lake Butler.
Ramadan Hospital is located between his home and the Union County Jail. About a mile from the hospital, Sheriff Whitehead received a call from the sheriff's office dispatcher indicating that there was a disturbance at the hospital. Sheriff Whitehead responded to that call.
When Sheriff Whitehead entered the emergency room at the hospital, the Respondent, his brother and the friend were in the waiting area of the hospital. The Respondent was standing in the hallway at that time, cursing and saying that he had just contacted his supervisor, taken to mean supervisor at the Alachua Correctional Facility, and that the Respondent was "fixing to have some people come over and they were going to get the situation straight".
Sheriff Whitehead identified himself to the Respondent and asked the Respondent what the problem was. The Respondent indicated that he had been involved in an incident at the local nightclub and that there had been a fight and his brother had been injured. The Respondent told Sheriff Whitehead that he was going to "take this thing into his own hands". The Respondent was also indicating "things" that he wanted to have done concerning the incident.
Respondent was cursing and using foul language. Sheriff Whitehead told the Respondent that he had to calm down or leave the premises. Sheriff Whitehead repeated this remark a number of times.
After a time Sheriff Whitehead went to a telephone in the hospital and called the sheriff's office dispatcher and asked that a deputy sheriff be sent.
During the course of these circumstances, the Respondent was belligerent and had the smell of alcohol about his person.
The Respondent was being very belligerent in telling the nurses something to the effect that he was going to "tear that place up if they didn't get this done." This related to the Respondent's concern that a doctor was not available to attend to his brother at the hospital.
The disturbance which the Respondent was causing was primarily directed to the hospital staff.
The Respondent continued his outbursts for several minutes.
In the course of this event, the Respondent identified himself as a law enforcement officer. Sheriff Whitehead told the Respondent that he needed to calm down and to let the Union County Sheriff's Department take care of the situation.
Finally, Sheriff Whitehead believed that he had lost control over the Respondent's conduct and told the Respondent that he was going to place the Respondent under arrest. The Respondent replied that "he did not need to be arrested, wasn't going to be arrested." Sheriff Whitehead then placed his arm on the Respondent's arm and the Respondent snatched his arm away from Sheriff Whitehead.
At that point Sheriff Whitehead took the Respondent through a set of doors to exit the hospital emergency room. They struggled out onto a patio area and onto the asphalt parking lot and then onto a grassy area where Sheriff Whitehead took the Respondent down and held him until a deputy sheriff arrived to assist.
Sheriff Whitehead told the Respondent that he was being arrested for breach of the peace, an offense which Sheriff Whitehead believed he had reasonable cause to arrest the Respondent for.
After the Respondent had been subdued and handcuffs placed on him, the Respondent became cooperative and acted remorseful, again explaining to Sheriff Whitehead that he was a correctional officer and that he was afraid he was going to lose his job because of the incident. The Respondent was then taken by a deputy sheriff to be transported to the Union County jail.
When Sheriff Whitehead was trying to talk to the Respondent, the Respondent would swing his arms and on several occasions made cursing remarks toward the nurses, which Sheriff Whitehead believed was because doctors were not available to attend the Respondent's brother at that time.
On August 6, 1991, Officers Glen Hammond, Donald Rice and Price responded to an alleged domestic disturbance call at 305 N.E. Fifth Street in Alachua, Florida. Those officers were working for the City of Alachua Police Department when they made the response.
The alleged domestic disturbance involved the Respondent, his mother, sister and brother.
When the officers arrived at the scene the other family members told the officers that the Respondent had been involved in a physical altercation with them and had battered them.
The Respondent's mother told Officer Hammond that the Respondent had been smoking crack cocaine prior to the arrival of the officers.
The family members told the officers that the Respondent was located in a wooded area near the residence. The officers went to find the Respondent so they could talk to him concerning the complaint by his family. Officer Wallace located the Respondent and brought him back to the residence.
While standing in front of the residence, the Respondent was arguing with his mother and using profanity. In addition, he yelled at Officer Hammond a few times to the effect that the Respondent wasn't going to be taken into custody. At that juncture there was no intention by the officers to arrest the Respondent.
At this time Officer Hammond did not observe anything about the Respondent's demeanor to suggest that the Respondent had consumed alcoholic beverages.
After a short period, the Respondent left the area adjacent to the residence and returned to the woods. The officers again went to find the Respondent so that they could discuss the complaint. While the officers were trying to locate the Respondent for the second time someone started yelling that the Respondent had returned to the residence and was inside the residence.
The officers then returned to the residence.
When Officer Hammond walked up to the front of the residence to an area adjacent to a porch on the front of the residence, the Respondent opened the door and stepped out holding a knife which appeared to be a steak knife.
The Respondent told Officer Hammond that Officer Hammond was not going to arrest him and that if Officer Hammond tried to come on the porch, the Respondent would kill Officer Hammond. The Respondent also mentioned the possibility that he would do harm to himself.
While standing on the porch, the Respondent was not acting in a rational manner.
After the Respondent threatened to kill Officer Hammond, the officer backed away from the residence and called for assistance from other law enforcement officers. Officer Hammond did this being fearful for his safety.
A second brother of the Respondent arrived at the residence when the Respondent went in the house from the front porch. The second brother went inside to try and talk to the Respondent to defuse the situation. The second brother managed to have the Respondent come out of the house, at which point, the Respondent was charged with disorderly intoxication.
At about the time the Respondent was arrested, Officer Hammond was close enough to the Respondent to notice that the Respondent had an odor of alcohol about the Respondent's person.
When Office Wallace found the Respondent in the woods on the first occasion, the Respondent did not resist the officer in any manner and agreed to go back to the residence with the officer.
When the Respondent returned to the residence on the first occasion, he stated that he would kill somebody first before he would go to jail. It is at that point that the Respondent broke from the scene and ran into the woods.
While on the porch, the Respondent stated that he would kill any officer or take his own life, and that the Respondent was not going to go to jail.
When the Respondent was first approached in the woods, Officer Wallace did not have grounds to arrest the Respondent.
When the Respondent came back from the woods the first time, Officer Hammond was trying to interview the Respondent concerning the circumstances between the Respondent and his family that had caused the officers to be summoned. When the Respondent returned to the woods for the second time, the officers did not have cause to arrest the Respondent.
When the Respondent told the officers that he was not going to be arrested or go to jail, upon the conversation that the officers held with the Respondent after he returned from the woods on the first occasion, the Respondent had not been told that he was being arrested.
When the Respondent went back in the house from the front porch, he locked the doors to the residence and still had possession of the steak knife.
The residence in question was reported to the officers as being the Respondent's mother's residence.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this case pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.
Having accused the Respondent of violations related to his certification as a correctional officer, Petitioner must prove by a clear and convincing evidence that the violations occurred. See, Ferris v. Turlington, 510 So.2d 292 (Fla. 1987).
To be qualified to serve as a correctional officer, the Respondent must, according to Section 943.13(7), Florida Statutes:
Have a good moral character as determined by a background investigation under procedures established by the commission.
The Respondent must maintain good moral character to hold his certification. There are consequences if the Respondent fails to maintain good moral character. Section 943.1395(7), Florida Statutes states:
Upon a finding by the commission that a certified officer has not maintained good moral character, the definition of which has been adopted by rule and is established as a statewide standard, as required by
943.13(7), the commission may enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties:
Revocation of certification.
Suspension of certification for a period not to exceed two years.
Placement on a probationary status
for a period not to exceed two years, subject to terms and conditions imposed by the commission. Upon the violation of such terms and conditions, the commission may revoke certification or impose additional penalties
as enumerated in this subsection.
Successful completion by the officer of any basic recruit, advance, or career development training or such retraining deemed appropriate by the commission.
Issuance of a reprimand.
The Commission has adopted a definition of good moral character to assist in the imposition of penalties for an officer's failure to maintain good moral character.
Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(b) and (c), Florida Administrative Code, in pertinent part, states:
For the purpose of the Commission's implementation of any of the penalties enumerated in subsection 943.1395. . . (7), a certified officer's failure to maintain good moral character, as required by subsection 943.13(7), is defined as:
* * *
The perpetration by the officer of an act which would constitute any of the following misdemeanor or criminal offenses, whether criminally prosecuted or not: . . . 784.011
. . . 843.02 . . ., or
The perpetration by the officer of an act or conduct which:
Significantly interferes with the rights of others; or
Significantly and adversely affects the functioning of the criminal justice system or an agency thereof; or
Shows disrespect for the laws of the state or nation; or
Causes substantial doubts concerning the officer's moral fitness for continued service.
* * *
The definition of good moral character is further defined in the case of Zemour, Inc. v. Division of Beverage, 347 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), as:
Moral character as used in this statute, means 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 populace for positions of trust and confidence.
Zemour was a case involving an applicant for a beverage license and the need to show good moral character to obtain the license.
Also, in Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re: G.W.L., 364 So.2d 454 (Fla. 1978), involving the matter of admission to the bar, the Florida Supreme Court explained that to show a lack of "good moral character":
Requires an inclusion of acts and conduct which causes a reasonable man to have substantial doubts about an individual's honesty, fairness, and respect for the rights of others and for the laws of the state and nation.
Concerning specific criminal law offenses, which are alleged to form the basis for a finding that the Respondent lacks good moral character, Section 784.011, Florida Statutes, defines an "assault". That law speaks to the intentional threat by acts or words to do violence to another person, together with the ability to do the violence, and performing an act which creates a well- founded fear in another that violence is imminent.
Section 843.02, Florida Statutes, makes it a crime to resist, obstruct, or oppose a law enforcement officer in the lawful execution of a legal duty.
The alleged violations that have been discussed in the facts involve encounters between the Respondent and law enforcement officers. Pursuant to Section 943.10(1), Florida Statutes, those law enforcement officers had been elected, appointed, or employed by a municipality or political subdivision of the state and were vested with the authority to make arrests, to prevent and detect crime, and to enforce the penal, criminal, traffic or highway laws of the State.
On August 2, 1989, Officer Brown and Sergeant Dennison were performing their legal law enforcement duties when they stopped the Respondent. The Respondent had violated Section 316.074, Florida Statutes, which required him to obey the stop signs. The stop signs constituted traffic control devices. In addition, the Respondent was required, as a Florida driver operating a motor vehicle, to have his license in his immediate possession and to display it when Officer Brown requested that it be displayed. This requirement was in association with Section 322.15, Florida Statutes. He failed to display the license in violation of that section.
The Respondent then resisted Officers Haefner and Sergeant Dennison in their attempt to place him in custody in violation of Section 843.02, Florida Statutes. His actions on this occasion violated Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(b), Florida Administrative Code.
In this incident Respondent violated Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(c), Florida Administrative Code, by significantly interfering with the rights of Officer Haefner and showing disrespect for the laws of the State of Florida.
On May 5, 1990, Sheriff Whitehead was acting in his law enforcement capacity when he encountered the Respondent. The circumstances led to the Respondent's knowing and willful resistance and opposition to a lawful arrest. This constituted violation of Section 843.02, Florida Statutes, and Rule 11B- 27.0011(4)(b), Florida Administrative Code.
In addition to the criminal law offense, Respondent violated Rule 11B- 27.0011(4)(c), Florida Administrative Code, by significantly interfering with the rights of Sheriff Whitehead and showing disrespect for the laws of the State of Florida.
On August 6, 1991, the Respondent violated Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(c), Florida Administrative Code, by significantly interfering with the rights of Officers Hammond and Wallace in arming himself with a knife, displaying it to the officers, and threatening to kill if the officers attempted to arrest him. This action also showed disrespect for the laws of the State of Florida.
These actions constituted a violation of Section 784.011, Florida Statutes, by constituting an assault against the officers, in violation of Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(b), Florida Administrative Code.
All these incidents caused substantial doubts concerning the Respondent's moral fitness for continued service as a corrections officer in violation of Rule 11B-27.0011(4)(c), Florida Administrative Code.
The proof of violations described was clear and convincing that Respondent has failed to maintain the requisite good moral character.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent's Certificate No. 28-85-402-02 be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 31st day of October, 1995, in Tallahassee, Florida.
CHARLES C. ADAMS, 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 31st day of October, 1995.
APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER CASE NO. 94-5306
The following discussion is given concerning the proposed findings of fact by Petitioner.
Petitioner's Facts:
Paragraphs 1 through 3 are subordinate to facts found. Paragraph 4 is not necessary to the resolution of the dispute. Paragraphs 5 through 30 are subordinate to facts found.
Paragraphs 31 and 32 are not necessary to the resolution of the dispute. Paragraph 33 is subordinate to facts found.
Paragraph 34 is not necessary to the resolution of the dispute. Paragraph 35 constitutes a conclusion of law.
Paragraph 36 is not necessary to the resolution of the dispute.
Paragraphs 37 through the first sentence in Paragraph 42 are subordinate to facts found. The second sentence in Paragraph 42 is not necessary to the resolution of the dispute.
Paragraphs 43 through 50 are subordinate to facts found.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Paul D. Johnston, Esquire Department of Law Enforcement
P. O. Box 1489
Tallahassee, FL 32302-1489
Joseph W. Little, Esquire 3731 Northwest 13th Place Gainesville, FL 32605
A. Leon Lowry, II, Director Department of Law Enforcement Criminal Justice Standards
and Training Commission
P.O. Box 1489
Tallahassee, FL 32302-1489
Michael Ramage, General Counsel Department of Law Enforcement
P.O. Box 1489
Tallahassee, FL 32302-1489
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit to the agency written exceptions to this Recommended Order. All agencies allow each party at least ten days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should contact the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case concerning agency rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| Apr. 02, 1996 | Final Order filed. |
| Oct. 31, 1995 | Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 9/14/95. |
| Oct. 27, 1995 | Respondent`s Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law filed. |
| Oct. 23, 1995 | Petitioner`s Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law filed. |
| Oct. 05, 1995 | Transcript of Testimony and Proceedings (Volume I) filed. |
| Sep. 14, 1995 | CASE STATUS: Hearing Held. |
| Sep. 08, 1995 | (Petitioner) Motion for Leave to Amend to Correct Scrivener`s Error filed. |
| Jul. 25, 1995 | Order sent out. (motion to dismiss is denied) |
| Jul. 10, 1995 | Order Granting Continuance and Rescheduling Hearing sent out. (hearing rescheduled for 9/14/95; 10:00am; Gainesville) |
| Jul. 10, 1995 | Motion for Continuance (Respondent) filed. |
| Jul. 07, 1995 | (Respondent) Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Apr. 07, 1995 | Order Rescheduling Hearing sent out. (hearing rescheduled for 7/11/95; 10:00am; Gainesville) |
| Jan. 05, 1995 | Order sent out. (hearing cancelled) |
| Jan. 04, 1995 | Joint Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Jan. 03, 1995 | Order sent out. (motion denied) |
| Dec. 30, 1994 | Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Motion to Set Aside Order Deemed Admitted Certain Request for Admissions and for Permission to File Response to Request for Admissions filed. |
| Dec. 22, 1994 | Order sent out. (motion to relinquish jurisdiction to agency is denied) |
| Dec. 22, 1994 | (Respondent) Notice of Appearance; Respondent`s Motion to Set Aside Order Deemed Admitted Certain Requests for Admission and for Permission to File Response to Request for Admissions; Response to Petitioner`s Request for Admissions filed. |
| Dec. 08, 1994 | (Petitioner) Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction filed. |
| Nov. 22, 1994 | Order sent out. (Petitioner`s motion is granted) |
| Nov. 07, 1994 | Petitioner`s Motion for Order Deeming Admissions Admitted filed. |
| Oct. 25, 1994 | Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 1/9/95; 10:00am; Gainesville) |
| Sep. 28, 1994 | Initial Order issued. |
| Sep. 22, 1994 | Agency referral letter; Administrative Complaint; Petitioner`s First Request for Admissions To Respondent; Election of Rights filed. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Apr. 01, 1996 | Agency Final Order | |
| Oct. 31, 1995 | Recommended Order | Licensee had a number of encounters with the police which proved that he had failed to maintain good moral character. |
