Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

JOHNNY EDDINES vs. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, 82-001965 (1982)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-001965 Visitors: 10
Judges: JAMES E. BRADWELL
Agency: Department of Children and Family Services
Latest Update: Apr. 28, 1983
Summary: The issue posed for decision herein is whether or not the Petitioner, Johnny Eddines, should be transferred from the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center. At the hearing, the Petitioner appeared on behalf of himself and also called Bernard Rubrecht, a rehabilitation counselor, and Estella Reid, Petitioner's mother. Petitioner was afforded the opportunity to cross-examine other witnesses who appeared and testified on behalf of Respondent. Respondent presented the testimony of Herbert Burrows, a program spec
More
82-1965

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


JOHNNY EDDINES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 82-1965

) STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT ) OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE ) SERVICES, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, James E. Bradwell, held a public hearing in this case on November 4, 1982, in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Johnny Eddines, pro se

222 North West 22nd Ave.

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33311


For Respondent: Lawrence Francis Kranert, Jr., Esquire

1000 South Federal Highway, Suite 103 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33316


ISSUE


The issue posed for decision herein is whether or not the Petitioner, Johnny Eddines, should be transferred from the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center.


At the hearing, the Petitioner appeared on behalf of himself and also called Bernard Rubrecht, a rehabilitation counselor, and Estella Reid, Petitioner's mother. Petitioner was afforded the opportunity to cross-examine other witnesses who appeared and testified on behalf of Respondent. Respondent presented the testimony of Herbert Burrows, a program specialist employed by Respondent for approximately 17 years, presently with the Children's youth and Family Division; Michelle Parrish, a group treatment leader at the Try Center; Veda Hamilton, a community control employee of Respondent since approximately 1975; Willie Hamilton, a district intake supervisor employed with Respondent approximately nine years; and Gregory Johnson, a supervisory employee of the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center and an employee of Respondent for approximately 12 years.


BACKGROUND


Petitioner has quite an extended history of offenses with the various juvenile law enforcement authorities in the Broward County area. As example, during early December, 1981, an Information was issued charging Petitioner with

uttering and forgery. Prior thereto, during September of 1981, Petitioner was charged with two third-degree felonies. During February of 1982, Petitioner was charged with attempting to take the property of a one Mr. Flooker and Martin L. Williams. During January, 1982, Petitioner was charged with an intent to defraud the Winn-Dixie Company of monies in excess of $100 by cashing checks.

Petitioner was committed to and remains in the custody of the Respondent, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. Petitioner has been ordered to make restitution on all the above-referred charges.


On March 19, 1982, Petitioner was placed in the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center, a non-residential center which has a program designed for rehabilitation, counseling and the provision of educational help.


FINDINGS OF FACT


Based upon my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor while testifying, the documentary evidence received, and the entire record compiled herein, the following relevant facts are found.


  1. As stated above, Petitioner was placed in the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center on March 19, 1982. At the time of his assignment to the Try Center (Center herein) Petitioner was advised of the requirement that he abide by the rules and regulations of the Center (testimony of Parrish, Burrows, Veda and Willie Hamilton, and Gregory Johnson).


  2. Petitioner was given an orientation of the Center at the time of his commitment and was thoroughly apprised of the Center's rules and regulations. In this regard, Petitioner signed an agreement expressing his obligation to abide by the Center's rules and regulations.


  3. Petitioner was given an entrance test when he was enrolled in the Center and he tested out on the "top level."


  4. Immediately upon his enrollment at the Center, Petitioner was counseled respecting his attitude ad behavior and the necessity of his being able to get along with other enrollees at the Center. On April 4, 1982, it was necessary for Petitioner to again have a conference with Ms. Parrish about his "obnoxious behavior."


  5. Approximately two months after Petitioner was enrolled at the Center, he was made a house manager by Ms. Parrish in an effort to foster better relations and such that he would be regarded as a role model by other enrollees.


  6. During a beach trip during early April of 1982, Ms. Parrish requested that Petitioner perform certain chores, as other enrollees were requested to do, whereupon Petitioner engaged in a lengthy emotional outburst involving the use of profanity and displaying of offensive behavior directed toward Ms. Parrish. Following that incident, Ms. Parrish recommended that Petitioner be demoted from house manager as he was not a proper role model for other enrollees.


  7. On April 7, 1982, Ms. Parrish called in Veda Hamilton to discuss Petitioner's behavior and his failure to abide by the Center's rules and regulations. Also, on April 15, 1982, Petitioner left the Center and returned, according to Ms. Parrish, under what appeared to be an influence of drugs.


  8. On April 28, 1982, Petitioner was arrested for uttering at Taylor's Liquor Store. Throughout this period of time, Ms. Parrish had numerous

    consultations with Petitioner wherein he (Petitioner) used profanity and other abusive language. Following these incidents, Ms. Parrish recommended that Petitioner be transferred from the Try Center program. During late May, 1982, when Petitioner was arrested at Taylor's Liquor Store for uttering, Ms. Hamilton observed Petitioner at a bar drinking a beer. At that time, Ms. Hamilton discussed with Petitioner the recommendation that his assignment at the Try Center would likely be revoked and the further recommendation that he be sent to the Eckerd Youth Development Center at Okeechobee, Florida.


  9. On June 21, 1982, a hearing was held with Petitioner and representatives of Respondent wherein the recommended transfer of Petitioner to the Eckerd Youth Center was considered. Petitioner was afforded the opportunity to present witnesses and to cross-examine other witnesses who appeared on behalf of Respondent. Following that hearing, on June 21, 1982, an Order of Transfer was issued by Respondent transferring him (Petitioner) from the Try Center's program based on, inter alia, Petitioner's continued acts of delinquency and his failure to abide by the rules and regulations of the Try Center's program.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  10. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter of and the parties to this action. Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.


  11. The parties were duly noticed pursuant to the notice provisions of Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.


  12. The authority of the Respondent is derived from Chapter 959, Florida Statutes, and Rule Chapter 10H-9, Florida Administrative Code.


  13. Competent and substantial evidence was offered to establish that the Petitioner should be transferred from the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center. In this regard, evidence herein reveals that the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center is a non- residential program which is less structured than other residential programs. Petitioner's actions and conduct while enrolled in the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center have not been in keeping with the rules and regulations of the Try Center and his assignment to a residential program appears to be a more appropriate placement consistent with his needs. In this regard, pertinent rules and regulations provide that a "transfer. . .from one treatment program to another treatment program may be accomplished in order for the child to be placed in a more appropriate placement consistent with his or her needs." Chapter 10H-9.02, Florida Administrative Code. Sufficient basis for a transfer to a program more consistent is justified in a situation wherein "the child is not responding to the rehabilitation program to which assigned. . ." Chapter 10H-9.02(4)(a), Florida Administrative Code. For these reasons, it is concluded as a matter of law that Petitioner should be transferred from the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center.


RECOMMENDATION


Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby


RECOMMENDED that the Respondent enter a Final Order transferring Petitioner from the Ft. Lauderdale Try Center to a higher-restrictiveness category treatment program more consistent with his needs.

RECOMMENDED this 17th day of January, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida.


JAMES E. BRADWELL, 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 Hearings this 17th day of January, 1983.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Johnny Eddines

222 North West 22nd Ave.

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33311


Lawrence Francis Kranert, Jr., Esquire 1000 South Federal Highway (Suite 103) Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33316


Alicia Jacobs, Esquire General Counsel Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services 1323 Winewood Blvd.

Tallahassee, Florida 32301


Mr. David H. Pingree Secretary

Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services

1323 Winewood Blvd.

Tallahassee, Florida 32301


Docket for Case No: 82-001965
Issue Date Proceedings
Apr. 28, 1983 Final Order filed.
Jan. 17, 1983 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 82-001965
Issue Date Document Summary
Apr. 26, 1983 Agency Final Order
Jan. 17, 1983 Recommended Order Petitioner transferred to higher restrictiveness category treatment program because he was not responding to present program.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer