“to as “Respondent, ‘and alleges: — Statute Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 463, and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality 02 . PE Cr Ty i is fe RECELUfSa BECEIVES. Respondent. ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner, ” files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Optometry against ADAM CHERRY, hereinafter referred Le "Effective July 1, 1997, Petitioner i is the state agency charged regulating the practice of Optometry pursuant to Section 20. 43, ‘Florida Health Care Administration to provide cc consumer complaint, investigative, . LEGAL COAPR 25 PH 3:94 ann? 6 7. al _ Assurance, councils, or boards, as appropriate, including the issuance of emergency orders of suspension or restriction. : Resp ndent i is, a id as been tall ti times ‘material hereto, a “certified Optometrist having been issued license number OP 00025 82. 4. ‘Respondent’ s 5 last known adress is 1272 NW 108th Avenue, “Plantation, Florida, 33322. 5. _ Respondent performed services as a an independent contractor s for Vision Express, Inc., during the period beginning i in or ‘around January, “1997, through in or around December, 1998. : : “Respon ent inc ica ed u at he per orme comprehensive eye examinations on patients to determine the health of their eyes, to provide itions, to provide medications for the treatment and ~ “spectacle prescription. In fact, the spectacle prescription appears to be U oo 7) 9." However, neither of these vision problems is correctable with a e conditions. — contraindicated for tl : to. Further review 4 of records for five 6) other pediatric p patients, V.W., K.G., L.K., R.H., and D.G., reveals that the Respondent has prescribed spectacle prescriptions that v were significantly different and diametrically opposed to their actual conditions they. were 2 supposed t to be correcting. 11. Respondent should not have written the prescriptions for the aforementioned patients. : 12. . Pe or reall ges and incorporates the allegations contained in n paragraphs 0 one 2e (1) through eleven a y above. 13. 14. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations contained Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’ s license to Practice « as in parogriphs 0 one Ve ( 1) through eleven ad 1 above, 15. ‘Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’ license to practice as Zn an optometrist in the State of Florida i is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 463. 3 O16(N(e), F Florida a Statutes, for fraud, deceit, negligence or : incompetency, or misconduct i in n the practice ofo optometry. penalties: department’ refusal to certify an » application f for licensure, ily requests the Board of. Opiometry to enter an n order imposing one or more of the following . : revocation or suspension of Respondent s license, imposition of an administrative fine not to exceed $5000, issuance of a reprimand, placement of Respondent’s license on probation for a period of time and subject to terms and/or conditions, and/or any other relief that the board deems © - approprdate SIGNED this_] YA day of Do, 0 2000. Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health ooo F | _.DEPUTY CLERK -CLERK me ab RDin . By Nancy Snurkowski; Chief Attorney ~ Practitioner Regulation-Legal Ps Office MQA Cho: ays tees _ Agency for Health Care Administration Lan. ~ General Counsel’s Office-MQA . icaksces” Ft Pecan he!

Docket for Case No: 00-002064