STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
IN THE MATTER OF )
)
RONALD SCARLATA )
Applicant for a Mortgage ) CASE NO. 75-1509 Broker License. )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
A hearing was held pursuant to notice in Room 104, Collins Building, Tallahassee, Florida at 1:00 p.m. on October 24, 1975, before Stephen F. Dean, assigned Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings.
This matter arose from the Notice of Intent to Deny License from the Department of Banking and Finance to Ronald Scarlata, said notice being accompanied by an Administrative Charge or Complaint. Ronald Scarlata filed a Request for Hearing on or about August 11, 1975, with the Department of Banking and Finance and the matter was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for hearing pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: William B., Corbett, Esquire
Department of Banking and Finance No appearance was made by Scarlata
Witnesses: Joseph M. Ehrlich, Deputy Director
Division of Finance
O. Allen Spradley, Supervisor Special Services
Department of Banking and Finance ISSUE
Whether Ronald Scarlata is entitled to licensure as a Mortgage Broker hawing allegedly failed to state on his
application for licensure that he had been arrested and had been indicted for a crime.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Hearing was delayed for thirty minutes in order to allow Ronald Scarlata additional time to appear. Because Scarlata failed to appear no further evidence was presented regarding why he should be entitled to a mortgage broker's license beyond the statements contained in his original application.
The Department of Banking and Finance was then directed to present its evidence as to why Ronald Scarlata should not be licensed as a mortgage broker. The Department of Banking and Finance called two witnesses, Ehrlich and Spradley, and offered Exhibits 1-4 for identification. Exhibits 1, 3, and 4 were received and Exhibit 2 was rejected because it lacked relevance to the charges.
Ronald Scarlata, the applicant for licensure, filed his application (Exhibit 1) together with a fingerprint card (Exhibit
3) with the Department of Banking and Finance as required by statute. The Department of Banking and Finance as a part of its normal procedure in reviewing such application, forwarded the fingerprint card of Ronald Scarlata to the Florida Department of Criminal Law Enforcement for a check of its files to determine if the applicant had ever been arrested in Florida. This check of the Florida Department of Criminal Law Enforcement files revealed no history of arrest of the applicant. The fingerprint card (Exhibit 3) was forwarded to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by the Florida Department of Criminal Law Enforcement for a check of its files. The check of its fingerprint cards by the Federal Bureau of Investigation revealed that the person by the name of Ronald A. Scarlata whose fingerprints matched those of the applicant had been arrested in Rochester, New York, for third degree burglary and attempted first degree grand larceny and was convicted of attempted second degree grand larceny.
The Department of Banking and Finance caused the Florida Department for Criminal Law Enforcement to inquire directly to the Rochester, New York authorities to determine whether their records coincided with those of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This inquiry resulted in the receipt of a TELEX message (Exhibit 4) received by 0. Allen Spradley, the addressee of the message, from the Rochester Police Department. This message confirms the information received by the Florida Department of Criminal Law Enforcement from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Spradley,
former employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation fingerprint identification branch, stated that entry on the Federal Bureau of Investigation report indicated a conviction and sentencing as opposed to probation without adjudication of guilt or conviction. The crime of attempted grand larceny in the second degree involves moral turpitude.
The application of Ronald Scarlata (Exhibit 1) indicates that the applicant answered question 5 on page 2, regarding prior arrests or indictments, in the negative, and subscribed the application on February 5, 1975.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Hearing Officer finds that Ronald Scarlata failed to accurately and truthfully answer question 5 on page 2 of his application regarding his prior arrest in Rochester, New York, and that said failure and the conviction for attempted second degree grand larceny constitute good and sufficient grounds for denial of a mortgage brokerage license to the applicant Ronald Scarlata under Section 494.05(2) and Section 494.05(1)(d), Florida Statutes.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Wherefore the Hearing Officer would recommend that Ronald Scarlata have his application for a mortgage brokerage license denied.
DONE and ORDERED this 29th day of October, 1975.
STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-9675
COPIES FURNISHED:
William B. Corbett, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Office of the Comptroller The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32304
Ronald Scarlata
125 Eastern Fork Longwood, Florida 32750
================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER
=================================================================
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE DIVISION OF FINANCE
IN THE MATTER OF:
RONALD SCARLATA, APPLICANT Department Administrative for a Mortgage Broker's Proceeding No. 75-18-DOF
Docket No. 75-1509
Respondent.
/
ORDER OF DENIAL
THIS CAUSE CAME ON for consideration upon the transcript of record of a final hearing held at Room 104, Collins Building, Tallahassee, Florida, on October 24, 1975 before the Division of Administrative Hearings. The record shows that the Respondent filed a Petition for Hearing and that the Hearing Officer mailed Notice of Hearing to the Respondent on October 9, 1975, at the address indicated in the Request for Hearing. The Department, by its counsel appeared at said hearing. The Respondent did not appear either in person or by counsel. The Hearing Officer proceeded to hear the witnesses and evidence presented by the Department. Thereafter, the Hearing Officer issued his Recommended Order, dated October 29, 1975, which is made a part hereof, by reference thereto. Subsequent to said Recommended Order, the Department received from the Hearing Officer an Amended Recommended Order dated November 5, 1975, which is also made a part hereof by reference thereto. The Amended Order directed the Department to withhold the issuance of an agency order for a period of thirty (30) days because of possible defects in the mailing of the Notice of Hearing. The Amended Order also gave the Respondent an additional thirty (30) days to respond and show cause, if any, why the original Recommended Order should be set aside. The Department is now advised by the Hearing Officer, by letter of December 15, 1975, that Respondent did not show cause nor offer a definite response within said additional thirty (30) day period. Upon consideration thereof and after being duly advised, the Department finds:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Respondent, RONALD SCARLATA, is an applicant for a Mortgage Broker's License under Chapter 494, F.S.
The Department has jurisdiction of the subject matter hereof and of the Respondent.
3,. Administrative Complaint and Charges along with Notice of Intent to Deny were issued by the Department of Banking and Finance, dated July 14, 1975, and the same were served on Respondent by certified mail.
The Respondent, filed a Request for Hearing.
The Department adopts the Findings of Fact of the Hearing Officer as stated in the Recommended Order, dated October 29, 1975.
The Department also adopts the Findings of Fact of the Hearing Officer as stated in the Amended Recommended Order, dated November 5, 1975.
The Department has reviewed and considered all of the facts and circumstances as recited in the Recommended Order of the Hearing Officer. It has also reviewed the files in this cause with regard to the facts and circumstances occuring subsequent to the Amended Recommended Order. Therefore, the Department further find that the Respondent has been afforded adequate notice of these proceedings and due process of law.
That no purpose would be served by continuing this proceeding or by reopening this case; and it further finds that the Respondent has failed or refused to show cause after he was presented with fair and reasonable opportunity to do so. In view of the above and foregoing findings of fact, the Department makes the following Conclusions of Law:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
That Respondent, RONALD SCARLATA, filed to accurately and truthfully answer question 5 on page 2 of his Application for License regarding his prior arrest in Rochester, New York, and that said failure to so answer said question constitutes a material misstatement on the application under Section 494.05(2), F.S., which is good grounds for denial of the Application. Further, the prior conviction of the Respondent for attempted
second degree grand larceny constitutes good and sufficient grounds for denial of a Mortgage Broker's License to the applicant, RONALD SCARLATA, under Section 494.05(1)(d), F.S.
Therefore, upon consideration of the above and foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
(1) That the Application for a mortgage Broker's License which was heretofore filed by Respondent, RONALD SCARLATA, be and the same is hereby denied.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tallahassee, Florida, this 26th day of January, 1976.
(SEAL) GERALD A. LEWIS , as State
Comptroller and Head of the Department of Banking and Finance
Copies furnished to:
Ronald Scarlata
125 Eastern Fork Longwood, Florida 32750
William B. Corbett, Jr., Esquire Assistant General Counsel Office of the Comptroller
Legal Annex
Tallahassee, Florida 32304
Stephen F. Dean, Esquire
Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 A
Issue Date | Proceedings |
---|---|
Feb. 04, 1976 | Final Order filed. |
Oct. 29, 1975 | Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. |
Issue Date | Document | Summary |
---|---|---|
Jan. 26, 1976 | Agency Final Order | |
Oct. 29, 1975 | Recommended Order | Petitioner is not entitled to license because falsified application by not stating arrests for crimes of moral turpitude. |