STATE OF FLORIDA

CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION

CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION,

Petitioner,

vs CASE NUMBER: 12442

WALTER CRAPP, DOAH NUMBER: 99-3079

Certificate No.: 60558

Respondent.

/

FINAL ORDER

This matter came before the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission (the Commission) at a public meeting on November 19, 1999, in Cocoa Beach, Florida. It was alleged by Administrative Complaint that the Respondent had violated specified sections of Chapter 943, Florida Statutes, and Chapter

11 B-27, Florida Administrative Code. In accordance with §§

120.569 and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, a formal hearing was held on this matter, and a Recommended Order was submitted by an administrative law judge from the Division of Administrative Hearings to the Commission for consideration. The Respondent filed exceptions to the Recommended Order, a copy of which is attached and incorporated herein by reference.

The Commission has reviewed the entire record of the formal hearing, has heard the arguments of the parties and is otherwise fully advised in the matter. The Commission's findings are set forth below.

1. Standards for Review

   
   

   Under §120.57(1)(j), Florida Statutes, the Commission may reject or modify the administrative law judge's conclusions of law and interpretations of the Commission's administrative rules in the Recommended Order. The Commission, however, may not reject or modify the administrative law judge's findings of fact unless the Commission determines from a review of the entire record, and states with particularity in this Final Order, that

   1) those findings of fact were not based on competent substantial evidence or 2) the proceedings on which the findings of fact were based did not comply with essential requirements of the law.

   The Florida Supreme Court, in De Groot v. Sheffield, 95 So.2d 912, 916 (Fla. 1957), defined "competent substantial evidence" to be evidence that is "sufficiently relevant and material that a reasonable mind would accept it as adequate to support the conclusion reached."

   
   

   Additionally, the Commission may not reweigh the evidence, resolve conflicts in the evidence, judge the credibility of witnesses or otherwise interpret the evidence anew simply to fit its desired conclusion. Heifetz v. Department of Business Regulation, 475 So.2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).

   
   

   Nor may the Commission reduce or increase the recommended penalty in the Recommended Order without first reviewing the complete record and without stating with particularity its reasons therefor in the Final Order. §120.57(1)(j), Florida Statutes.

   
   

2. Rulings on Exceptions

   
   

   The Respondent filed exceptions to the administrative law judge's findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommended penalty in the Recommended Order. The Commission finds that, in his exceptions to the findings of fact, the Respondent is merely attempting to re-litigate the factual disputes that were resolved by the administrative law judge in her Recommended Order. The Commission further finds that there is competent substantial evidence to support each of the administrative law judge's findings of fact, including the ultimate finding that the "Respondent knowingly gave false testimony under oath about what had occurred." (R.O., par. 32) Therefore, those findings of fact will not be disturbed by the Commission. Accordingly, the Respondent's exceptions to the findings of fact are rejected.

   
   

   Likewise, the Commission rejects the Respondent's exceptions to the administrative law judge's conclusions of law. The Commission finds that the administrative law judge correctly interpreted and applied the law to the facts of the instant case.

   
   

   The Commission, however, agrees with the Respondent that the administrative law judge's recommended penalty is disproportionate to the Respondent's acts of misconduct found by the administrative law judge. The Commission, therefore, accepts the Respondent's exceptions to the recommended penalty and imposes a lesser penalty on the Respondent's law enforcement certification, as set forth below.

3. Findings of Fact

   
   

   The administrative law judge's findings of fact in paragraphs 1 through 23 of the Recommended Order are approved, adopted and incorporated herein by reference.

   
   

4. Conclusions of Law

   
   

   The administrative law judge's conclusions of law in paragraphs 24 through 33 of the Recommended Order are approved, adopted and incorporated herein by reference.

   
   

5. Recommended Penalty

The administrative law judge's recommended penalty is rejected. After a review of the complete record in this matter, the Commission finds that a penalty involving less than revocation of the Respondent's law enforcement certification is appropriate, given the nature of the Respondent's misconduct.

See CJSTC v. Bradley, 596 So.2d 661 (Fla. 1992).

It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The Respondent's above-referenced criminal justice certification is hereby SUSPENDED retroactively for a period of two years, beginning on November 26, 1996, and continuing through November 25, 1998.

   
   

2. The Respondent will be on probation for one year, beginning fifteen days from the date of the filing of this Final Order. The Respondent must comply with the following terms of probation:

   
   

   1. The Respondent shall refrain from violating federal, state and local laws. If during the period of probation the Respondent violates any part of Chapter 943, Florida Statutes, or Title 11B, Florida Administrative Code, and is later found at a formal or informal hearing (conducted within or beyond the probationary period) to have committed such a violation, then the Commission will revoke all of the Respondent's criminal justice certification and eligibility for certification.

      
      

   2. The Respondent must make himself available to answer any questions and produce any documents requested by the Commission or its staff curing his probationary period.

      
      

3. This Final Order will become effective upon filing with the Clerk of the Department of Law Enforcement.

SO ORDERED this 27th day of December, 1999.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION

PATRICK M. KELLY CHAIRMAN

NOTICE

THIS ORDER CONSTITUTES FINAL AGENCY ACTION. ANY PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS ORDER HAS THE RIGHT TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES, BY FILING ONE COPY OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE CLERK OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, P.O. BOX 1489, TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32302-1489, AND BY FILING A SECOND COPY OF THE NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE APPROPRIATE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 9.1 10, FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUCH NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS ORDER IS RENDERED.

Docket for Case No: 98-003079

Orders for Case No: 98-003079