FILED Department of Business and Professional Regulation Deputy Agency Clerk STATE OF FLORIDA . Evette Lawson-Proctor DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULA 7127/0012 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIOR DESIGN, Petitioner, vs. CASENO.: 2011-061204 . 2011-055294 ROY D. MURPHY, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Architecture and Interior Design against ROY D. MURPHY, ("Respondent"), and says: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of architecture pursuant to Section 20.165, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 455 and 481, Florida Statutes. 2. Respondent, is and has been at all times material hereto, a licensed architect in the State of Florida, having been issued license number AR 2714. 3, Respondent’s address of record is 169 Pearl Avenue, Tavernier, Florida, 33070. 4, Richard E. Hopkins (“Hopkins”) entered into a contract to perform architectural services for a commercial project known as the Snook’s Bayside Restaurant. 5. Hopkins prepared the drawings for the commercial project. 6. At all times material hereto, Hopkins was not duly registered or certified to engage in the practice of architecture pursuant to Chapter 481, Florida Statutes. 7. Respondent signed and sealed the plans prepared by Hopkins for permitting. 8. The aforementioned plans and drawings were prepared outside of Respondent’s office. 9. Respondent failed to maintain as evidence of his efforts: written calculations, correspondence, time records, check prints, telephone logs, site visit logs or research done for the project. 10. Respondent failed to maintain written documentation that he has personally supervised the preparation of all documents and instruments of service, reviewed all project data, personally inspected the project site and entered into a written agreement with the persons preparing the documents accepting professional responsibility for such work. 11. The Respondent was not present when the plans were delivered by Dean. 12. Respondent did not supervise the preparation of the aforementioned plans and drawings. 13. The Respondent functioned as essentially a “plan stamper” for Hopkins’s plans since Hopkins is not licensed to practice architecture in the State of Florida. 14. The Respondent has adopted the aforementioned plans as his own work and thereby accepted professional responsibility for the aforementioned plans. 15. In another matter, Respondent entered into a contract with Michael and Susan Beudoin to provide architectural services on a residential project. 16. Harum Architects were the previous architect on the project and Respondent took over the project and used the drawings of Harum Architects. 7. Respondent failed to notify Harum Architects he was the successor architect on the project as required by Rule 61G1-18.002, Florida Administrative Code. 8. Further, the Respondent was offering architectural services though a business entity known as Architectural Associates. 9, Architectural Associates does not have a certificate of authorization to offer or provide architectural services in the State of Florida. COUNT I 20. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nineteen (19) as if fully set forth herein. 21. Section 481.221(4), Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part that no registered architect shall affix her or his signature or seal to any final construction document or instrument of service which includes drawings, plans, specifications, or architectural documents which were not prepared by her or him or under her or his responsible supervising control or by another registered architect and reviewed, approved, or modified and adopted by her or him as her or his own work according to rules adopted by the board. 22. Rule 61G1-23.015(1), Administrative Code, require the architect to prepare and maintain as evidence of the architect’s efforts: written calculations, correspondence, time records, check prints, telephone logs, site visit logs or research done for the project and shall provide such evidence to state or local authorities upon their request. 23. Rule 61G1-23.015(2), Administrative Code, requires the architect to maintain written documentation that the architect has personally supervised the preparation of all documents and instruments of service, reviewed all project data, personally inspected the project site and entered into a written agreement with the persons preparing the documents accepting professional responsibility for such work. 24. Rule 61G1-23.015(3), Administrative Code, requires the architect to be present whenever such final work is submitted to a client, in order to respond to questions and maintain written minutes of such a submission meeting. 25. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 481.221(4), Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G1-23.015, Administrative Code, by improperly certifying work prepared by another. COUNT IT 26. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nineteen (19) as if fully set forth herein. 27. Section 481.225(1)(i), Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part that no registered architect shall aid, assist, procure, or advise any unlicensed person to practice architecture contrary to this part or to a rule of the department or the board. 28. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 481.225(1)(i), Florida Statutes, by assisting Hopkins in his performance of unlicensed activity contrary to Chapter 481, Florida Statutes. COUNT II 29. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nineteen (19) as if fully set forth herein. 30. Section 481.225(1)(a), Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part that violating any rule of the board lawfully adopted pursuant to this part or Chapter 455 constitutes grounds for disciplinary action. 31. Rule 61G1-18.002, Florida Administrative Code, contains the requirements for a successor architect to use the drawings of the original architect. 32, Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 481.225(1), Florida Statutes and Rule 61G1-18.002, Florida Administrative Code, by failing to notify the original architect of Respondent’s intent to use its work. COUNT IV 33. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nincteen (19) as if fully set forth herein. 34. Section 481.219(2), Florida Statutes, requires a certificate of authorization for a corporation, partnership, or fictitious name offering architectural services. 35. Based upon the foregoing, the Respondent has violated Section 481.219(2), Florida Statutes, by offering architectural services through Architectural Associates without a certificate of authorization. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board enter an Order imposing one or more of the following penalties: Imposition of probation, reprimand the licensee, revoke, suspend, deny the issuance or renewal of the certificate or registration, require financial restitution to a consumer, impose an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per count, require continuing education, assess costs associated with investigation and prosecution, impose any or all penalties delineated within Section 455.227(2), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board is authorized to impose pursuant to Chapters 481 and 455, Florida Statutes, and/or the rules promulgated thereunder. & , Signed this 26 dayof Dely , 2012. . . T— DAVID K. MINACCL Smith, Thompson, Shaw, Minacci & Colon, P.A. 3520 Thomasville Road, Fourth Floor Tallahassee, Florida 32309 FL Bar No. 0056774 Ph: (850) 402-1570 Fax: (850) 241-0161 PCP: July 16, 2012 Hall Shore Gozdz

Docket for Case No: 13-000333PL