Judges: DIANE D. TREMOR
Agency: Department of Education
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 1981
Summary: Respondent was guilty of conspiring to traffic in cocaine, which is gross immorality. Recommend Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for three years.
80-1515.PDFSTATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES COMMISSION )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 80-1515
)
THOMAS H. ABBOTT, JR., )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice, an administrative hearing was held before Diane D. Tremor, Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative Hearings, on November 12, 1980, in the Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida. The transcript of the Hearing was filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings on January 6, 1981. By motion filed with the undersigned on January 28, 1981, the respondent, through newly retained counsel, requested additional time within which to file a proposed recommended order.
Without objection from counsel for the petitioner, this motion was granted and respondent's proposed recommended order was filed on February 16, 1981. The issue for determination at the hearing was whether respondent's substitute teaching certificate should be revoked or otherwise disciplined for the reasons set forth in the petition dated July 29, 1980.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Craig R. Wilson
Ruffolo and Wilson
315 Third Street, Suite 204 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
For Respondent: Thomas Abbott, Jr.
and Thomas Abbott, Sr. Route 9, Box 514D Jasper, Alabama 33501
and Robert C. Apgar
Peeples, Earl, Smith, Moore and Blank
300 East Park Avenue Post Office Box 1169
Tallahassee, Florida 32302 INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to a "Petition for Revocation of Teacher's Certificate" executed on July 29, 1980, the Educational Practices Commission seeks to revoke, suspend or take other appropriate action against the teaching certificate of respondent Thomas Abbott. It is alleged that on or about October 16, 1979, respondent conspired to traffic cocaine in his home in West Palm Beach, and that on or
about October 17, 1979, respondent conspired to sell cocaine while drinking in the Victoria Station in West Palm Beach. Petitioner charges that such conduct is grossly immoral, is not a proper example for students, is sufficiently notorious to bring him and the education profession into public disgrace and disrespect, and has seriously reduced respondent's effectiveness as an employee of the school board, all in violation of Sections 231.28 and 231.09, Florida Statutes, and Rule 6B-1, Florida Administrative Code.
In support of its position, the petitioner presented the testimony of J. Thomas Pintacuda, Jack Maxwell, Robert Anderson and John Carroll, all with the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office; John Williamson and Bernard Mortenson, both with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; Valerie Rolle, with the Department of Corrections; and Donald T. Rott and Jay K. Schrimsher, both with the Palm Beach County School Board. Petitioner also introduced into evidence the deposition of Duane Hutchins taken on April 2, 1980, in connection with the criminal proceeding styled State of Florida v. Haywood Abbott, Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Case No. 79-3524CF. Respondent presented the testimony of his brother, Michael H. Abbott, and himself. Documentary evidence received at the hearing included Petitioner's Exhibits 1 through 3 and respondent's Exhibit A.
Petitioner and respondent have submitted proposed recommended orders which have been fully considered by the undersigned. To the extent that the proposed findings of fact are not incorporated in this Recommended Order, they are rejected as being either not supported by competent, substantial evidence, irrelevant or immaterial to the issues in dispute or as constituting conclusions of law as opposed to findings of fact.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found:
In September of 1979, John Williamson, an undercover police agent with the Department of Law Enforcement, was involved in narcotic investigations in the Pensacola area. Mike Abbott, who is the brother of respondent Thomas Abbott, and Williamson negotiated for the purchase of one kilo of cocaine in October of 1979. The transaction was to occur in West Palm Beach. On or about October 15 or 16, 1979, Mike Abbott and Robert Covington came from Pensacola to West Palm Beach and stayed at the home of respondent Thomas Abbott. Mike Abbott came to West Palm Beach for the purpose of introducing "one person to another person for the sale" of the cocaine. Apparently, the two people who were to be introduced were Robert Covington and Duane Hutchins. For this degree of involvement in the transaction, Mike Abbott was to receive $7,000.00.
On October 16, 1979, Duane Hutchins came to the respondent's West Palm Beach residence for the purpose of meeting Mike Abbott and Robert Covington.
The meeting lasted approximately thirty to forty minutes, during most of which time respondent Thomas Abbott was sleeping on the living room floor. Respondent did awaken several minutes before Hutchins left and was introduced to him.
At some point after this meeting at respondent's home, Mike Abbott returned to Pensacola with the understanding that his $7,000.00 fee would be delivered to him after the sale of cocaine was consummated. Covington remained at respondent's home, and he and respondent went out for drinks that evening. According to Hutchins, Mike Abbott told him that he had to return to Pensacola and that respondent Thomas Abbott, Mike's brother, would be the person to
contact in absence. It was arranged that Hutchins would call respondent's house the following day and speak to either respondent or Mr. Covington to determine the details of the meeting with the purchasers.
Undercover agent John Williamson arrived in West Palm Beach on October 17, 1979, and met with Jack Maxwell, a vice officer with the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department. Williamson placed a telephone call to the respondent's residence, but he did not know to whom he spoke. Arrangements were made to meet at Victoria Station, a local restaurant and lounge in West Palm Beach, at approximately 4:30 that afternoon.
When respondent returned to his residence after school at about 3:00
p.m. on October 17, 1979, Covington and Hutchins were there. They invited respondent to go to Victoria Station with them. Respondent drove back to school to ask a student to fill in for him on a part-time job that evening, and Covington and Hutchins followed respondent in another car. Respondent then left his car at school and rode to Victoria Station with Covington and Hutchins.
Covington, Hutchins and respondent arrived at Victoria Station at about 4:00 or 4:30 p.m. on October 17, 1979. Shortly thereafter, agents John Williamson and Jack Maxwell arrived. The five men sat at one table, conversed and ordered several rounds of alcoholic beverages which were made of double strength. It was Hutchins plan to view the money to be used for the cocaine purchase and then place a telephone call to a Mr. Cunningham who was to join them for the purpose of finalizing the location of the transaction. After spending approximately forty-five minutes at the table, agents Maxwell and Williamson took Hutchins across the street to their Sheraton Motel room in order to show him the cash money. Hutchins was shown a briefcase containing some
$100,000.00 in cash. He then returned to Victoria Station and placed a phone call to Cunningham. Hutchins left to pick up Cunningham in his car and then returned to Victoria Station with Cunningham. The six men then had discussions as to the location of the transaction. During these conversations, respondent Thomas Abbott offered the use of his house as the location for the exchange of the money for the cocaine.
At approximately 8:00 p.m., Hutchins left Victoria Station for another engagement. Agents Maxwell and Williamson returned to their motel room for the purpose of waiting for information as to the location of the final transaction. Respondent Abbott and Covington left Victoria Station with Cunningham and went to Cunningham's apartment. While there, Cunningham made several phone calls. Thereafter, Cunningham drove Covington and respondent to respondent's house and dropped them off. Cunningham then went over to the Sheraton Motel room where final plans were made with agents Maxwell and Williamson for the purchase to occur in Miami.
Thereafter several persons, not including the respondent, drove to Miami and completed the purchase and sale of cocaine. Those participants were arrested, and nearly one kilo of 43 percent to 52 percent pure cocaine was confiscated.
Agent Williamson returned to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Department during the early morning hours of October 18, 1979. At approximately 4:30 a.m. he placed a telephone call to Mike Abbott in Pensacola for the purpose of obtaining instructions as to how he was to be paid for his part of the transaction. The telephone conversation was recorded on tape. After determining that Mike Abbott expected $7,000.00 for his part of the transaction, Williamson asked Mike Abbott "Do you want me to bring the $7,000.00 to you or do you want me to give it to
your brother." "Give it to my brother," was Mike Abbott's response. Later in the same conversation, Williamson told Mike that what he was going to do was "see your brother now, and then I'll lay the seven on him." Mike responded, "Okay, that'll be excellent."
After that taped telephone conversation between Williamson and Mike Abbott, law enforcement officers went to the respondent's residence and arrested respondent Thomas Abbott and Robert Covington.
Mike Abbott testified that his brother knew nothing about the purchase and sale of cocaine until he was arrested on October 18, 1979. Respondent testified that he knew nothing about the drug deal and that he was too intoxicated to realize what the conversation concerned while in Victoria Station. Agent Maxwell testified that while they all were drinking alcoholic beverages at Victoria Station, respondent appeared to be cognizant of occurring events and conversation.
Some three to four weeks after respondent was arrested, he went to the residence of Deputy Sheriff Robert C. Anderson whom he had known since 1969. When Anderson asked him why he had gotten involved in drugs, respondent replied that he thought it was exciting, very professional and that he wanted to be in big money. Respondent went on to describe the excitement of talking of
$50,000.00, throwing money around and everybody buying drinks for each other. Anderson and respondent discussed the morality of dealing with drugs and respondent stated that he did not feel it was morally wrong since drugs had been accepted by society. During the same conversation, respondent later told Anderson that the reason be became involved was for his brother.
Two administrative officials of the Palm Beach County School Board testified that, in their opinion, respondent's effectiveness as a teacher would be diminished if the charges of conspiracy to sell or traffic cocaine were sustained.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Petitioner alleges that Respondent Thomas H. Abbott, Jr., is guilty of conspiracy to traffic cocaine in his home on or about October 16, 1979, and conspiracy to sell cocaine in the Victoria Station on or about October 17, 1979.
The evidence concerning events at respondent's residence on or about October 16, 1979, is totally deficient to demonstrate that respondent participated in a conspiracy to traffic cocaine. The testimony establishes that respondent was asleep during the meeting which occurred between his brother Mike Abbott, Mr. Covington and Mr. Hutchins, and awoke only minutes before Hutchins departed. There was no evidence that respondent was a part of or privy to any discussions which Mike Abbott, Covington or Hutchins may have had on that occasion relating to the trafficking of cocaine.
The evidence with respect to the events which occurred on the following day is more compelling. When respondent returned to his home after school on October 17, 1979, two persons who were going to Victoria Station for the purpose of coordinating a transaction for the sale and exchange of cocaine invited respondent to accompany them. Respondent accepted the invitation. He sat at the same table and conversed with them for some three to four hours. While there, two undercover agents and a third person joined the discussion. During the conversations, respondent offered the use of his home for the site of the exchange of money for cocaine. He later left Victoria Station with
Covington and Cunningham and went to Cunningham's residence. There, telephone calls were made by Cunningham in pursuit of final arrangements for the transaction. In addition, Hutchins had been told on October 16, 1979, to contact respondent as to the meeting place for discussion on October 17, 1979. Undercover agent Williamson was told to deliver Mike Abbott's $7,000.00 fee to respondent upon completion of the transaction.
The two necessary elements of the crime of conspiracy are an agreement and an intention to commit an offense. Proof of a formal agreement is not necessary to establish the existence of a conspiracy. The existence of a conspiracy can be inferred from circumstantial evidence as indicative of an overall plan. Resnick v. State, 287 So.2d 24 (Fla. 1974); Borders v. State, 312 So.2d 247 (Fla. 3rd DCA, 1975)
The evidence in this case is not only consistent with guilt on respondent's part, it is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. It would not be reasonable to assume that respondent took a stranger into his home, went out with him the evening before, was invited to join a group who were meeting for the purpose of finalizing a drug transaction, was seated for some three to four hours with up to five persons discussing and taking steps to finalize a criminal transaction, offered the use of his home as the site for the final event, and was the object of instruction to deliver the sum of
$7,000.00 -- all without intent and understanding to cause the offense of the sale and purchase of cocaine to be committed. The respondent's denial of any knowledge as to the illegal transaction being planned and coordinated at Victoria Station on or about October 17, 1979, is simply not credible. The undersigned concludes that petitioner has presented competent, substantial evidence to sustain the charge against respondent of conspiracy to sell cocaine at Victoria Station.
The petitioner contends that conspiracy to sell cocaine constitutes conduct which is grossly immoral, which seriously reduces a teacher's effectiveness as an employee of the school board, which is not a proper example for students and which is sufficiently notorious to bring the teacher and the education profession into public disgrace and disrespect, thus providing grounds for suspension or revocation of respondent's teaching certificate under Sections
231.28 and 231.09, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 6B-1, Florida Administrative Code.
No evidence was presented by the petitioner regarding the notoriety of the respondent's conduct on or about October 17, 1979. Therefore, even if it were a recognized ground for disciplinary action, it has not been adequately proven by the petitioner.
Petitioner has demonstrated that respondent, through his involvement in a conspiracy to sell cocaine, has engaged in gross immorality and an act involving moral turpitude and has thereby seriously reduced his effectiveness as an employee of the school board. Section 231.28(1), Florida Statutes. Such conduct, obviously, does not provide a proper example for students as required by Section 231.09(2), Florida Statutes. Having adequately demonstrated that respondent is guilty of gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude and personal conduct which seriously reduces his effectiveness as a teacher, petitioner has the authority, pursuant to Section 231.28, Florida Statutes, to take the following disciplinary action against respondent's teaching certificate: suspension not to exceed three years, revocation not to exceed ten years, and permanent revocation.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law recited herein, it is RECOMMENDED that:
That portion of the "Petition for the Revocation of the Teacher's Certificate" charging that respondent conspired to traffic cocaine in his home on or about October 16, 1979, be DISMISSED;
Respondent be found guilty of conspiracy to sell cocaine while drinking in the Victoria Station in West Palm Beach on or about October 17, 1979;
The conduct described in paragraph (2) above constitutes gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude and seriously reduces respondent's effectiveness as an employee of the school board; and
Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for a period of three (3) years.
Respectfully submitted and entered this 6th day of March, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida.
DIANE D. TREMOR
Hearing Officer
Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building
2009 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearing this 6th day of March, 1981.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Craig R. Wilson Ruffolo and Wilson
315 Third Street, Suite 204 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Thomas Abbott, Jr.
and Thomas Abbott, Sr. Route 9, Box 514D Jasper, Alabama 33501
Robert C. Apgar
Peeples, Earl, Smith, Moore and Blank
300 East Park Avenue Post Office Box 1169
Tallahassee, Florida 32302
Juhan Mixon
Professional Practices Commission
319 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Donald L. Griesheimer Executive Director
Educational Practices Commission
319 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301
================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER
=================================================================
STATE OF FLORIDA EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION
RALPH D. TURLINGTON COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION,
Petitioner,
vs. CASE NO. 81-002-RT
DOAH CASE NO. 80-1515
THOMAS H. ABBOTT,
Respondent.
/
FINAL ORDER
Respondent, Thomas H. Abbott, holds Florida teaching certificate number 375400. On July 29, 1980 a petition for the revocation of teacher's certificate was filed against the Respondent. A hearing was held before Diane D. Tremor, a hearing officer for the Division of Administrative Hearings, on November 12, 1980. A Recommended Order was forwarded to the Education Practices Commission under the provisions of Sections 231.261 and 231.262, F.S.
A duly constituted panel of the Commission met on May 18, 1981 and considered the Recommended Order and the exceptions filed by the Respondent. Petitioner was represented by Craig Wilson, Esquire, and the Respondent by Robert C. Apgar, Esquire. The teacher panel of the Commission adopts the Findings of Fact of the hearing officer as contained in the Recommended Order as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
In September of 1979, John Williamson, an undercover police agent with the Department of Law Enforcement, was involved in narcotic investigations in the Pensacola area. Mike Abbott, who is the brother of respondent Thomas Abbott, and Williamson negotiated for the purchase of one kilo of cocaine in
October of 1979. The transaction was to occur in West Palm Beach. On or about October 15 or 16, 1979, Mike Abbott and Robert Covington came from Pensacola to West Palm Beach and stayed at the home of respondent Thomas Abbott. Mike Abbott came to West Palm Beach for the purpose of introducing "one person to another person for the sale" of cocaine. Apparently, the two people who were to be introduced were Robert Covington and Duane Hutchins. For this degree of involvement in the transaction. Mike Abbott was to receive $7,000.00.
On October 16, 1979, Duane Hutchins came to the respondent's West Palm Beach residence for the purpose of meeting Mike Abbott and Robert Covington.
The meeting lasted approximately thirty to forty minutes, during most of which time respondent Thomas Abbott was sleeping on the living room floor. Respondent did awaken several minutes before Hutchins left and was introduced to him.
At some point after this meeting at respondent's home, Mike Abbott returned to Pensacola with the understanding that his $7,000.00 fee would be delivered to him after the sale of cocaine was consummated. Covington remained at respondent's home, and he and respondent went out for drinks that evening. According to Hutchins, Mike Abbott told him that he had to return to Pensacola and that respondent Thomas Abbott, Mike's brother, would be the person to contact in Mike's absence. It was arranged that Hutchins would call respondent's house the following day and speak to either respondent or Mr. Covington to determine the details of the meeting with the purchasers.
Undercover agent John Williamson arrived in West Palm Beach on October 17, 1979, and met with Jack Maxwell, a vice officer with the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department. Williamson placed a telephone call to the respondent's residence, but he did not know to whom he spoke. Arrangements were made to meet at Victoria Station, a local restaurant and lounge in West Palm Beach, at approximately 4:30 that afternoon.
When respondent returned to his residence after school at about 3:00
p.m. on October 17, 1979, Covington and Hutchins were there. They invited respondent to go to Victoria Station with them. Respondent drove back to school to ask a student to fill in for him on a part-time job that evening, and Covington and Hutchins followed respondent in another car. Respondent then left his car at school and rode to Victoria Station with Covington and Hutchins.
Covington, Hutchins and respondent arrived at Victoria Station at about 4:00 or 4:30 p.m. on October 17, 1979. Shortly thereafter, agents John Williamson and Jack Maxwell arrived. The five men sat at one table, conversed and ordered several rounds of alcoholic beverages which were made of double strength. It was Hutchins' plan to view the money to be used for the cocaine purchase and then place a telephone call to a Mr. Cunningham who was to join them for the purpose of finalizing the location of the transaction. After spending approximately forty-five minutes at the table, agents Maxwell and Williamson took Hutchins across the street to their Sheraton Motel room in order to show him the cash money. Hutchins was shown a briefcase containing some
$100,000.00 in cash. He then returned to Victoria Station and placed a phone call to Cunningham. Hutchins left to pick up Cunningham and then returned to Victoria Station with Cunningham. The six men then had discussions as to the location of the transaction. During these conversations, respondent Thomas Abbott offered the use of his house as the location for the exchange of the money for the cocaine.
At approximately 8:00 p.m., Hutchins left Victoria Station for another engagement. Agents Maxwell and Williamson returned to their motel room for the
purpose of waiting for information as to the location of the final transaction. Respondent Abbott and Covington left Victoria Station with Cunningham and went to Cunningham's apartment. While there, Cunningham made several phone calls.
Thereafter, Cunningham drove Covington and respondent to respondent's house and dropped them off. Cunningham then went over to the Sheraton Motel room where final plans were made with agents Maxwell and Williamson for the purchase to occur in Miami.
Thereafter several persons, not including the respondent, drove to Miami and completed the purchase and sale of cocaine. Those participants were arrested, and nearly one kilo of 43 percent to 52 percent pure cocaine was confiscated.
Agent Williamson returned to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Department during the early morning hours of October 18, 1979. At approximately 4:30 a.m. he place a telephone call to Mike Abbott in Pensacola for the purpose of obtaining instructions as to how he was to be paid for his part of the transaction. The telephone conversation was recorded on tape. After determining that Mike Abbott expected $7,000.00 for his part of the transaction, Williamson asked Mike Abbott, "Do you want me to bring this $7,000.00 to you or do you want me to give it to your brother?" "Give it to my brother," was Mike Abbott's response.
Later in the same conversation, Williamson told Mike that what he was going to do was "see your brother now, and then I'll lay the seven on him." Mike responded, "Okay, that'll be excellent."
After that taped telephone conversation between Williamson and Mike Abbott, law enforcement officers went to the respondent's residence and arrested respondent Thomas Abbott and Robert Covington.
Mike Abbott testified that his brother knew nothing about the purchase and sale of cocaine until he was arrested on October 18, 1979. Respondent testified that he knew nothing about the drug deal and that he was too intoxicated to realize what the conversation concerned while in Victoria Station. Agent Maxwell testified that while they all were drinking alcoholic beverages at Victoria Station, respondent appeared to be cognizant of occurring events and conversation
Some three to four weeks after respondent was arrested, he went to the residence of Deputy Sheriff Robert C. Anderson whom he had known since 1969. When Anderson asked him why he had gotten involved in drugs, respondent replied that he thought it was exciting, very professional and that he wanted to be in big money. Respondent went on to describe the excitement of talking of
$50,000.00, throwing money around and everybody buying drinks for each other. Anderson and respondent discussed the morality of dealing with drugs and respondent stated that he did not feel it was morally wrong since drugs had been accepted by society. During the same conversation, respondent later cold Anderson that the reason he became involved was for his brother.
Two administrative officials of Palm Beach County School Board testified that, in their opinion, respondent's effectiveness would be diminished if the charges of conspiracy to sell or traffic cocaine were sustained.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
In his exceptions to the Recommended Order Respondent raises the issues of sufficient notice under Section 120.60(6), F.S. A hearing officer has the authority to dismiss a petition seeking a license revocation on the grounds
that proper notice under that section has not been given. See Sheppard v. Board of Dentistry, 385 So2d 143 (Fla. 1 DCA 1980). The hearing officer in this cause considered Respondent's motion, took testimony, and chose not to dismiss the complaint. This panel adopts that decision.
The panel DENIES paragraphs 2 and 3 of Respondent's exceptions, which dispute the Findings of Fact.
The panel rejects Respondent's arguments concerning the Conclusions of Law in the Recommended Order. The hearing officer, as the finder of fact, weighs the evidence and testimony. The hearing officer made findings of facts concerning the allegations against the Respondent, and stated that the allegations had been proven so as to be not only consistent with guilt on Respondent's part, but inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. This certainly meets the standard urged by Respondent, and meets any requirement of Bowling v. Department of Insurance, 394 So2d 165 (Fla. 1 DCA, 1951).
Respondent asserts that the evidence does not show "full knowledge of another's wrongdoing under the principles of law in Back v. Board of Dentistry,
378 So2d 34 (Fla. 1 DCA, 1979). The hearing officer did find knowledge on the part of Respondent, and it is instructive to note that Respondent did not address the issue of his admission of involvement. See Findings of Fact, paragraph 12. Respondent also asserts that if he is guilty of the conduct, it is not actionable under the holding of Pearl v. Florida Board of Real Estate,
394 So2d 189 (Fla. 3 DCA, 1981). We note that the court in Pearl was dealing with a statute which proscribes crimes involving moral turpitude in the licensing of real estate salesmen. That court held that mere felony possession of a controlled substance does not constitute moral turpitude when the statute involved "is to insure the protection of the public from unscrupulous and dishonest real estate brokers." In a case involving a teacher in the public schools, a different statute and standard is involved. In Tomerlin v. Dade County School Board, 318 So2d 159 (Fla. 1 DCA, 1975), the court said,
"A school teacher holds a position of great trust. We entrust the custody of our children to the teacher. We look to the teacher to educate and to prepare our (sic) children for their adult lives. To fulfill this trust, the teacher must be of good moral character; to require less would jeopardize the future lives of our children."
The panel adopts the conclusion of law of the hearing officer that petitioner has presented competent, substantial evidence to sustain the charge against respondent of conspiracy to sell cocaine at Victoria Station.
The panel adopts these conclusions of law of the hearing officer, and concludes that Respondent is guilty of
conduct which constitutes gross immorality;
an act of moral turpitude; and
personal conduct which seriously reduces
his effectiveness as a school board employee,
all of which are grounds for revocation under the terms of Section 231.28, Florida Statutes.
All members of this panel stated that they have reviewed the record in this case; and Helen Juarez stated she made no observations or comments during the deliberations of this case.
The panel concludes that participation in the type activity of which Respondent has been shown guilty is completely incompatible with the duties and responsibilities of a public school teacher.
Therefore, it is the
ORDER of this teacher panel of the Education Practices Commission that certificate number 315400 of Respondent, Thomas H. Abbott be PERMANENTLY REVOKED.
DONE AND ORDERED this 1st day of June, 1981.
Marjorie Hankins Presiding Officer
Filed in the records of the Education Practices Commission and copies furnished to all parties this 2nd day of June, 1981.
Donald L. Griesheimer Clerk
Docket for Case No: 80-001515
Orders for Case No: 80-001515
| Issue Date |
Document |
Summary |
|
Jun. 01, 1981 |
Agency Final Order
|
|
|
Mar. 06, 1981 |
Recommended Order
|
Respondent was guilty of conspiring to traffic in cocaine, which is gross immorality. Recommend Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for three years.
|
