STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

WILLIAM EAGLER, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 77-458

)

DEPARTMENT OF OFFENDER )

REHABILITATION, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, an administrative hearing was held before Michael R.N. McDonnell, Hearing Officer, with the Division of Administrative Hearings at 9:30

1. on July 19, 1977, in the City Council Chamber, City Hall Building, 151 Southeast Osceola, Ocala, Florida.

   
   

   APPEARANCES

   
   

   For Petitioner: William Eagler, pro se For Respondent: Earl Archer, Esquire

   Petitioner (hereafter Eagler), an employee of Respondent, Department of Offender Rehabilitation (hereafter DOR), appeals his fifteen working day suspension without pay for alleged violations of Rules l0B-l3.02(4) and (11), Florida Administrative Code. These rules of conduct apply to DOR employees and provide:

   
   

   (4) Each employee shall keep himself physically fit, mentally alert, personally neat and clean and shall perform his duties fairly and impartially, and otherwise conduct himself both on duty and off duty so as to command the respect of inmates, fellow employees, and the general public. Each employee's conduct shall be at all times consistent with the maintenance of proper security and welfare of the institution

   and of inmates under his supervision.

   * * *

   (11) No employee shall be insubordinant, neglectful, or unwilling to follow lawful orders or perform officially designated duties.

   
   

   The issue is whether the disciplinary action taken by DOR against Eagler for violation of the foreoging regulations was for good cause.

   FINDINGS OF FACT

   
   

   1. On November 15, 1975, Eagler was employed by DOR as a correctional officer at Florida Correctional Institution, Lowell, Florida, and was working the first or 12:00 to 8:00 a.m. shift. At about 7:30 a.m. Eagler was required to participate in the conduct of a prisoner count according to the following standard procedure.

      
      

   2. At the institution there are four separate dormitories labelled A thru D respectively. Dormitories A and B are located at the south end of the institution and Dormitories C and D are located at the north end. Between the north and the south ends of the institution is the dining hall and lieutenant's office. During the count, a team of two correctional officers are assigned responsibility for two dormitories. In the first dormitory, one officer conducts a prisoner count while the other observes. The roles are then reversed with the second officer conducting his own prisoner count. In the event the two counts do not coincide, a recount is conducted in order to isolate the source of the error. The procedure is repeated in the second dormitory. A count is then made of the dining hall personnel after which all correctional officers meet in the lieutenant's office to report the total count. If the count does not coincide with the actual prisoner population, an escape and recapture plan is immediately implemented.

      
      

   3. On the morning in question, Eagler along with correctional officer Robert L. Bannister was assigned to conduct the prisoner count in B and C dormitories. In the initial count of B dormitory, Bannister came up with a count of 60 while Eagler came up with a count of 59. Although the procedure is to require both counts to coincide, Eagler at this point declared that he would accept Bannister's count.

      
      

   4. Sergeant Arthur J. Chandler was the shift supervisor and upon learning of these events ordered Eagler to conduct a recount. In response, Eagler said he would accept Bannister's count but Chandler advised that such procedure was impermissable and ordered Eagler to conduct a recount. Eagler refused and then refused a third time. Eagler never did conduct a recount so Bannister along with another correctional officer conducted a recount of Dormitory B and a proper count was cleared at 8:00.

      
      

   5. During Eagler's discussions with Sergeant Chandler, Eagler not only refused to conduct a recount but became boisterous and talked in a loud angry manner, occasionally using mildly profane language. This was done within the sight and hearing of some 40 to 50 inmates in Dormitory B. Sergeant Chandler directed Eagler to go to the lieutenant's office but Eagler did not immediately comply although he did ultimately proceed to the lieutenant's office at an undetermined time.

      
      

   6. The importance of implementing the prisoner count procedure expeditiously cannot be overemphasized. The success of recapturing an escaped prisoner and the minimization of such mischief as an escaped prisoner might accomplish in the community is directly proportional to the timeliness of the implementation of the escape and recapture plan. It is also considered good corrections procedure to avoid airing differences between correctional officers in front of inmates. It is more desirable to present a common front to the inmates and resolve differences in private.

      CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

      
      

   7. Eagler's attempted reliance upon his fellow correctional officer's count rather than upon his own and the resultant delay in the completion of the count procedure constitutes a violation of Rule l0B-l3.02(4) in that such conduct is inconsistent with the maintenance of proper security and welfare of the Florida Correctional Institution.

      
      

   8. Eagler's contentious attitude and conduct violates the portion of Pale lOB-13.02(4) requiring each employee to conduct himself so as to command the respect of inmates and fellow employees. Eagler's failure to conduct a recount as directed by Sergeant Chandler constitutes a violation of Rule lOB-l3.02(11) in that such conduct constitutes insubordination, neglect and an unwillingness to follow lawful orders and an unwillingness to perform officially designated duties.

      
      

   9. The disciplinary action taken against Eagler for violation of Rules lOB-l3.02(4) and (Il) was for good cause.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Career Service Commission sustain the action taken by DOR.

DONE and ENTERED this 28th day of July, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.

MICHAEL R. N. McDONNELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Carlton Building, Room 530 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of July, 1977.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Raymond Gearey, Esquire Department of Offender

Rehabilitation

1311 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida

Mrs. Dorothy Roberts Appeals Coordinator

Department of Administration Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. William R. Eagler

5273 Northwest 63rd Place Ocala, Florida 32670

Earl Archer, III, Esquire

Department of Offender Rehabilitation 1311 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Docket for Case No: 77-000458

Orders for Case No: 77-000458