Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
CHRISTOPHER ROBERTSON MURPHY vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 88-004439 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-004439 Latest Update: Feb. 22, 1989

Findings Of Fact At all times pertinent to the allegations contained herein, the Respondent, Florida Real Estate Commission, (Commission), was the state agency charged with the regulation of the profession of real estate in Florida and is the licensing agency for real estate salesmen and brokers. On or about April 20, 1988, the Petitioner, Christopher R. Murphy, prepared and submitted, along with the appropriate fee, to the Department of Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate, an application for licensure as a real estate salesman. At paragraph 6 of the application form appears the question: Have you ever been convicted of a crime, found guilty, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere (no contest), even if adjudication was withheld? Petitioner answered, "Yes (2)" to this question and consistent with further instructions on the form, indicated: August 9, 1978, arrested Lima, Peru, Charged with Traficking [sic] in cocaine, sentenced to 24 months Oct. 4, 1985, arrested in Jacksonville Florida, Charged with conspiracy to possess & distribute, sentenced 42 mos. At the hearing, Petitioner admitted that in 1978 he was arrested for trafficking in cocaine in Lima, Peru. He was in pretrial confinement for 27 months prior to his conviction, which, he claims, did not meet with the requirements of due process. The facts of the case were that he was in Peru with a friend who was in the cocaine business. It was his companion, not him, he claims, who had cocaine in his hotel room and because Petitioner was with him there, he, too, was charged. Petitioner admits that he knew his friend was in Peru to buy cocaine and that he went with him willingly, but claims that he was not a party to the purchase nor did he own or possess any of the cocaine. He also admits that in 1985 he was convicted in Jacksonville, Florida of conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine. He claims, however, that this conviction will be reconsidered by the court even though he admits to being guilty of the offense. There was, however, no evidence of any appeal of the conviction filed by Petitioner and his representation that his case will be reconsidered is based on his cooperation in an ongoing investigation about which he cannot speak. The fact remain that he has been convicted and the conviction still stands. Mr. Murphy was born in 1938 in Boston. In later years, his father worked as a civil engineer on the Saturn 5 project for NASA and he has lived in Florida for 30 years. He is presently a student of accounting due to graduate with a degree in education. He wants his real estate license because he is interested in real estate and in mortgage brokerage and wants to establish a family business, the prime thrust of which will be mortgage brokerage. Nonetheless, he feels a real estate license would go hand in glove with this end. Petitioner contends he disclosed everything in his application. As a result of the trial in Jacksonville, he was sentenced to three and a half years in prison. He was given credit for the 6 months pretrial confinement he spent in County Jail, served 18 months of the full term, and spent an additional 6 months in a halfway house. While in prison, he took college courses in real estate, finance, and management. By Order dated November 28, 1988, the Comptroller of the State of Florida, incorporated a Stipulation between the Department of Banking and Finance and the Petitioner which had the effect of granting Petitioner's application for a probationary mortgage broker's license, and he is currently so licensed in Florida. Mr. Murphy regrets his errors and claims he has left that part of his life behind him. He wants the license for which he has applied so that he can do something better with his life consistent with the plans mentioned previously. Kent Brink, a real estate broker in Odessa, Florida, has known Petitioner for approximately five years from the time when Petitioner first bought a piece of property through him. Since that time, he has gotten to know Petitioner socially as well and has mutual friends and business associates with him. He is aware of Petitioner's reputation for honesty, truthfulness, trustworthiness, and his reputation for good character within the community and it is good in all respects. He is aware of Petitioner's convictions and what they are for, and in spite of that, trusts him and would hire him if he were licensed. He would have no problem trusting his own reputation and the welfare of his clients with the Petitioner. Steven G. Burgess, the sales manager for Keystone Real Estate in Holiday, Florida, met the Petitioner about a year and a half ago and is aware of Petitioner's criminal record. Since their meeting, however, he has had numerous business dealings with the Petitioner and has found him to be reliable. He has had no problem trusting Petitioner and has found him to be totally honest. Petitioner's reputation for honesty, truthfulness, and good character in the community, as he knows it, is good. Sheryl Howard, a builder in Brooksville, Florida, has known Petitioner for approximately one year, having met him through a real estate transaction Petitioner had with her father. Petitioner came to work for her and her father in the building business. He was hired to work with punch lists and to run errands and in that capacity, he had to be trusted. He was given a key to the office without problem, and always accomplished the job requested of him, going beyond that which was required. She is aware of Petitioner's criminal record because he made it known to her. Nonetheless, if he is licensed, she would be happy to have him work for her and would trust him with access to her escrow account and her funds. Petitioner demonstrated exceptionally poor judgement as well as criminality in his involvement in the two offenses of which he was convicted. Even conceding that the lack of due process during his Peruvian conviction, he admitted he was there in the company of his friend who he knew was involved in an unlawful activity. Nonetheless, for the purpose of argument, disregarding that conviction, he also admits his involvement in and guilt of the cocaine offense in Jacksonville. There is no doubt that drug offenses are egregious and nefarious and his involvement therein indicates a complete disregard not only for the laws of this state and country, but for the welfare of his fellow citizens, the same group which would serve as potential clients were he to be licensed. Nonetheless, it would appear from the evidence presented by Petitioner and unrebutted by Respondent that he has changed and has been rehabilitated. The evidence shows he has been tested in the community since his release from prison, and has passed the test. He has shown evidence of an attempt to better himself through education and employment and has satisfied those for and with whom he worked that he can be trusted. It is found, therefore, that he has been rehabilitated and no longer presents a threat or danger to the interests of the public and investors with whom he is likely to come into contact.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore: RECOMMENDED that Petitioner, Christopher R. Murphy, be deemed eligible to sit for examination for licensure as a real estate salesman in Florida. RECOMMENDED this 22nd day of February, 1989 at Tallahassee, Florida. ARNOLD H. POLLOCK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of February, 1989. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 88-4439 The following constitutes my specific rulings pursuant to Section 120.59(2), Florida Statutes, on all of the Proposed Findings of Fact submitted by the parties to this case. By the Petitioner: 1. & 2. Accepted and incorporated herein 3. & 4. Accepted as a reflection of the evidence Accepted and incorporated herein Accepted as a comment on the evidence Accepted and incorporated herein & 9. Accepted and incorporated herein By the Respondent: 1. - 4. Accepted and incorporated herein COPIES FURNISHED: Ralph C. Stoddard, Esquire 132 Lithia Pinecrest Road Brandon, Florida 33511 Lawrence S. Gendzier, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Suite 212 400 West Robinson Orlando, Florida 32801 Darlene F. Keller Executive Director DPR, Division of Real Estate Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.17475.25
# 2
RALPH D. JONES, JR. vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, 04-000390 (2004)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Jacksonville, Florida Feb. 02, 2004 Number: 04-000390 Latest Update: Nov. 02, 2004

The Issue Whether Petitioner is qualified to take the examination for licensure as a registered assistant rental estate appraiser.

Findings Of Fact Respondent is a state agency in Florida responsible for regulating the practice of real estate in Florida pursuant to Sections 475.001 and 475.05, Florida Statutes. On or about May 14, 2003, Petitioner, Ralph D. Jones, Jr., submitted an application for registration as an assistant real estate appraiser. On the application, Petitioner answered "yes" to the question on the application regarding criminal history indicating Petitioner had a criminal history. Petitioner disclosed on the application that he had in Virginia two larceny charges, a concealment charge, a driving while license suspended charge, a hit and run charge, three assault charges and an obstruction of law enforcement charge: a total of six felony convictions. On or about October 7, 2004, the FREAB conducted an informal hearing regarding Petitioner's application for licensure and the aforementioned crimes. Petitioner attended the hearing and submitted letters attesting to his good character for the FREAB's consideration. The FREAB issued an order denying Petitioner's application. On or about December 2, 2003, the FREAB conducted a second informal hearing regarding Petitioner's application for registration and his criminal record. Petitioner appeared at this hearing and was questioned by the FREAB about the circumstances surrounding Petitioner's criminal history. At the formal hearing, Petitioner testified about the circumstances of his criminal history, with an emphasis on the length of time since his last criminal conviction, and the type of offenses committed by applicants that were approved by the FREAB. He pointed out that it had been over five years since he had been in trouble. It is noted that it had been an even longer time between Petitioner's most recent problems, arising from the breakup of his marriage, and his prior convictions. It is noted that his most recent offenses related to his divorce five years ago. Petitioner has not had his civil rights restored. Petitioner wants to work on his "apprenticeship," so he can become a registered appraiser. Following the hearing, the FREAB issued an order denying the Petitioner's application for a second time.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is RECOMMENDED: That Respondent permit Petitioner to take the examination, and if Petitioner passes the examination, that Respondent issue a license to Petitioner conditioned on the following: Restoration of his civil rights by the Virginia authorities; Practice under the direction of a licensee designated by Respondent with periodic reports on Petitioner's professional conduct for a period of 24 months; and Automatic revocation of Petitioner's license upon the commission of any offense constituting a misdemeanor or felony in Florida Law or any violation of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes. DONE AND ENTERED this 28th day of April, 2004, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S STEPHEN F. DEAN Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of April, 2004. COPIES FURNISHED: Ralph D. Jones, Jr. 781 Begonia Street Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 Jason W. Holtz, Esquire Department of Business and Professional Regulation 400 West Robinson Street, N801 Orlando, Florida 32801 Nancy Campiglia, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Frank Gregoire, Chairman Real Estate Appraisal Board Department of Business and Professional Regulation 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802-1900

Florida Laws (6) 120.569120.57475.001475.05475.615475.624
# 3
PATRICE HARRISON GAGE vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 82-000624 (1982)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-000624 Latest Update: Dec. 17, 1982

Findings Of Fact On July 1, 1981, the Petitioner Gage applied to the Respondent Department of Professional Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission for licensure as a real estate salesman. The Petitioner Gage was informed by counsel for the Florida Real Estate Commission on September 28, 1981, that the Commission denied her application for licensure at its September 23, 1981 meeting. As stated by counsel, the Commission's denial was based on Sections 475.17 and 475.25, Florida Statutes, which require an applicant to be "honest, truthful, trustworthy, and of good character and. . .have a good reputation for fair dealing . . ." The specific reason for the Commission's action was based on the Petitioner Gage's answer to question six of the licensing application and her criminal record. In response to the Commission's denial, the Petitioner Gage requested an administrative hearing and the case was forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings on March 1, 1982. On March 5, 1982, the Florida Real Estate Commission sent the Petitioner Gage a letter informing her that the case had been sent to the Division and reiterating the following: In order for there to be no confusion on your part the reason you were denied by the Board of Real Estate (now the Florida Real Estate Commission) is due to your answer to question six on the real estate application and your statements before the Board of Real Estate on January 19, 1982. Question six reads: 'Have you ever been arrested for or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation including traffic offenses (but not parking, speeding, inspection or traffic signal violations) without regard to whether convicted, sentenced, pardoned or parole? If yes, state details including the outcome in full:' Your answer revealed a 1980 "no contest" plea to vehicular homicide. The Board denied your application based on this incident. It was the Board of Real Estate's view that you failed to show good character, honesty, truthfulness, and trustworthiness as set forth in Section 475.17, Florida Statutes. Further the Board's decision is also based on Section 475.25(1)(f) and Section 475.25(1)(m), Florida Statutes. (e.s) On September 5, 1979, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Petitioner Gage was involved in an auto accident in Fort Myers, Florida, in which the driver of a car which she struck was injured. The officer at the scene who observed the Petitioner Gage and took statements from witnesses, charged her with driving while intoxicated (DWI). Due to a possible concusion, the Petitioner Gage was taken to a hospital and while at the hospital refused a blood alcohol test. The officer who arrested the Petitioner for DWI did not pursue the test and did not at that time believe that the driver of the other auto was severely injured. At the time of the accident the Petitioner Gage was driving with her headlights off. The officer who arrested the Petitioner drove the section of the road where the accident occurred on the following night and observed sufficient street lighting to see the road, although it should have been apparent to a driver when his or her headlights were off. The driver of the auto which the Petitioner Gage struck died in the hospital on October 4, 1979, of a brain hemorrhage which resulted from injuries he received in the accident. Upon his death, the DWI charge was nolle prossed and a charge of vehicular homicide was filed against the Petitioner. On the advice of counsel, Petitioner Gage pled guilty to the charge of vehicular homicide. Adjudication of guilt was withheld, she was placed on five years probation and fined $5,000. One of the conditions of probation imposed by the sentencing judge was that she maintain full employment. The Petitioner Gage admitted that the accident was her fault and that she was driving recklessly. She stated that she was emotionally upset on the day of the accident having just that morning signed a settlement agreement which ended her marriage. The Petitioner has not been arrested or convicted of any crime or traffic infraction either before or after the incident in question. She receives no rehabilitative alimony from her husband, is the sole support of herself and has custody of a minor child. She is a college graduate and has been offered a real estate position with a well known Miami firm when she becomes licensed. Character references were received from the Petitioner's friends, including her pastor and former attorney, attesting to her good character and integrity. As stated by her former attorney, ". . .[i]n spite of [Petitioner's] problems arising out of that automobile accident, I feel her to be an honest and trustworthy person. . .Personally, if I was going to sell some property or buy some property, I would have no reservation in using [Petitioner] as a purchasing or selling agent." (Petitioner's Exhibit 2) If licensed as a real estate salesman, the Petitioner Gage would not endanger the interest of the public and investors. Counsel for the Department has urged that the Petitioner Gage be denied licensure due to inconsistencies in her testimony at the final hearing which demonstrate that she lacks the honesty and good character necessary to be a licensed real estate salesman. Essentially, these inconsistencies involve differences between the Petitioner and the arresting officer concerning peripheral events surrounding her arrest for DWI and eventual conviction for vehicular homicide. Some of these differences are attributable to semantics, i.e., the headlights, streetlines, probation reporting, while others are due to the Petitioner's poor recollection of events which occurred during a particularly traumatic moment in her life. In specific regard to her failure to answer question six of the application, the Petitioner honestly and correctly answered that she had been arrested and convicted of vehicular homicide. Both the arrest for DWI and vehicular homicide arose from the same transaction. When she appeared before the Commission on January 19, 1982, the Petitioner Gage was confused concerning the legal status of her DWI arrest and whether this constituted an arrest for a traffic offense since she had received no points on her license. The Petitioner did not intend to mislead the Commission concerning the 1979 incident and it appears that the Commission's denial was based solely on her one prior conviction for vehicular homicide rather than a perceived lack of candor on her part.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That a Final Order be entered approving the application of Patrice Harrison Gage for licensure as a real estate salesman. DONE and ORDERED this 29th day of October, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. SHARYN L. SMITH, 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 29th day of October, 1982.

Florida Laws (4) 112.011120.57475.17475.25
# 4
EARNESTINE D. DAVIS vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 80-002343 (1980)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 80-002343 Latest Update: Aug. 24, 1992

Findings Of Fact The Petitioner applied to the Board of Real Estate for licensure as a real estate saleswoman on or about July 28, 1980. After due deliberation the Board informed the Petitioner, on October 31, 1980, that she had been denied licensure due to her answers to question 6 of the application which revealed that she had a criminal record involving an arrest for larceny. The Petitioner exercised her rights to a formal proceeding pursuant to Chapter 120.57, Florida Statutes, and appeared at the hearing pro se, without witnesses, being permitted to testify on her own behalf. The Petitioner admitted that in 1977 she had been arrested and convicted in Leon County for the crime of grand larceny by embezzlement. She was employed as Manager of a Burger King restaurant at the time and was, in effect, convicted of embezzling bank deposits for the restaurant. The Petitioner pled not guilty to the charge but was found guilty pursuant to jury verdict. Upon her conviction she was sentenced to six months in the Florida State Prison at Lowell, Florida, followed by four years probation. The Petitioner remains on probation for that conviction and is making restitution payments to replace the money stolen. She was unable to testify precisely when her probationary period will expire, but it is to be approximately in October, 1981, and would have been sooner had she not fallen in arrears in making restitution payments. She is now making her payments currently and regularly and there is no other impediment to her being released from probation once full restitution is made. During the course of her cross-examination the Petitioner also admitted that she had been arrested by the Tallahassee Police Department in 1972 for the crime of larceny and further admitted that she had not disclosed this arrest on her application with the Board of Real Estate. The Petitioner indicated she had forgotten about the arrest and she felt that it was so remote in time as to not be pertinent to the application process. She was found guilty of the charge of larceny in connection with the 1972 arrest, the sentence being payment of a fine and restitution to the victim. Subsequent to her release from prison, the Petitioner has married, and is the mother of two young sons. She is currently employed by the Polk County School Board as a teacher's aid for disabled children. In order to qualify for this employment position she had to have a high school degree and sufficient college credit hours to meet the requirements for employment as a teacher's aid. Prior to this job she was employed in Polk County as a substitute teacher. The Petitioner is a member of a church and attends regularly and her general demeanor and the overall tenor of her testimony demonstrates that she has matured significantly since the unfortunate criminal behavior in which she engaged end has achieved a stable family life and employment pattern. She has demonstrated significant maturity of character since the time of the arrest and conviction, measured by the fact that she has accepted and successfully discharged the responsibility of marriage, the rearing of two children, and the concomitant duties and responsibilities of employment for the partial support of her family.

Recommendation In consideration of the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as well as the candor and demeanor of the witness, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered by the Board of Real Estate denying the application of Earnestine D. Davis for licensing as a real estate saleswoman at this time, but that she be given prompt and beneficial consideration for licensure upon appropriate reapplication when her current criminal probationary status has terminated. DONE AND ENTERED this 7th day of May, 1981 in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. P. MICHAEL RUFF 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 7th day of May, 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: Earnestine D. Davis 880 Parkham Court Bartow, Florida 33830 Jeffrey A. Miller Assistant Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs Office of Attorney General Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Nancy Wittenberg, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.17475.25
# 5
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION vs. RICHARD L. PURKEY, 88-000399 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-000399 Latest Update: Jul. 29, 1988

Findings Of Fact At all times material to these proceedings, the Respondent was the holder of Florida real estate license number 0201688. The last license issued was as a nonactive broker with a home address of 2281 Euclid Avenues Fort Myers, Florida. On December 10, 1986, the Respondent entered a plea of guilty to the offense of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud in Case No. 861034CF in the Circuit Court of Lee County, Florida. The crime did not involve any business dealings in which the Respondent was acting as a real estate salesman or broker. The Respondent did not notify the Petitioner in writing of his plea within the thirty-day period because he believed he had entered a plea to a misdemeanor, which was exempt from the reporting requirement of 475.25(1)(p), Florida Statutes. A letter from his attorney before the plea was entered reflected an intent to enter a plea to a misdemeanor, subject to acceptance by the court. On July 15, 1987, in Case No. 86-1790CF in the Circuit Court of Lee County, Florida, the Respondent entered nolo contendere pleas to uttering a forged instrument in Counts I, III, V, VII, IX, XI, and XIII and grand theft in Counts II, VI, VIII, X, XII, and XIV. These charges involved personal business affairs and did not involve misconduct by the Respondent as a real estate salesman or broker. The Respondent notified the Florida Real Estate Commission of his adjudication of guilt for the grand thefts and the utterings of forged instruments in Case No. 86-1790CF by letter dated August 7, 1987. There are no specific findings of mitigating or aggravating circumstances as none were presented during the hearing of this case.

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.2590.902
# 6
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. GEORGE A. HEYEN, 75-002052 (1975)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 75-002052 Latest Update: Mar. 22, 1977

Findings Of Fact George A. Heyen is a duly registered real estate salesman with the Florida Real Estate Commission, and was so registered and has been so registered continuously since October 1, 1972, as evidenced by Petitioner's Exhibit number 1. While serving in the capacity as a real estate salesman, the Respondent entered into a listing agreement with one Thomas S. Bowers and Brenda L. Bowers, his wife. This agreement was drawn on December 11, 1973 and is Petitioner's Exhibit number 4. On February 6, 1974, a purchase and sell agreement was drawn up by the Respondent and entered into between Maria A. Hindes and the Bowers. This purchase and sell agreement is Petitioner's Exhibit number 3. This contract of February 6, 1974 was submitted to Molton, Allen and Williams, Mortgage Brokers, 5111 66th Street, St. Petersburg, Florida. The contract, as drawn, was rejected as being unacceptable for mortgage financing, because it failed, to contain the mandatory FHA clause. When the Respondent discovered that the February 6, 1974 contract had been rejected, a second contract of February 8, 1974 was prepared. A copy of this contract is Petitioner's Exhibit number 5. The form of the contract, drawn on February 8, 1974, was one provided by Molton, Allen and Williams. When, the Respondent received that form he prepared it and forged the signature of Mr. and Mrs. Bowers. The explanation for forging the signatures as stated in the course of the hearing, was to the effect that it was a matter of expediency. The expediency referred to the fact that the parties were anxious to have a closing and to have the transaction completed, particularly the sellers, Mr. and Mrs. Bowers. Therefore, in the name of expediency the signatures were forged. Testimony was also given that pointed out the Bowers were very hard to contact in and around the month of February, 1974, and some testimony was given to the effect that the Bowers made frequent trips to Ohio, but it was not clear whether these trips would have been made in the first part of February, 1974. The Bowers discovered that their name had been forged when they went to a closing on April 11, 1974. They refused to close the loan at that time. On April 24, 1974, a new sales contract was followed by a closing which was held on April 26, 1974 and a copy of the closing statement is Petitioner's Exhibit number 6. The Respondent has received no fees or commissions for his services in the transaction and there have been no further complaints about the transaction. Prior to this incident, the Respondent, George A. Heyen, was not shown to have had any disciplinary involvement with the Florida Real Estate Commission and has demonstrated that he has been a trustworthy individual in his business dealings as a real estate salesman.

Recommendation It is recommended that the registration of the registrant, George A. Heyen, be suspended for a period not to exceed 30 days. DONE and ENTERED this 8th day of April, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Richard J. R. Parkinson, Esquire Associate Counsel Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road Winter Park, Florida 32789 George A. Heyen c/o Gregoire-Gibbons, Inc. 6439 Central Avenue St. Petersburg, Florida 33710

Florida Laws (1) 475.25
# 7
CARLA B. ROSARIO vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 83-000591 (1983)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 83-000591 Latest Update: Aug. 15, 1983

Findings Of Fact Petitioner, Carla B. Rosario, filed an application for licensure as a real estate salesman with respondent, Department of Professional Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission, on September 24, 1982. Rosario had previously passed the examination with a score of 80. Question 6 on the application asks if the applicant had ever "been arrested for, or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation including traffic offenses. . .without regard to whether convicted, sentenced, pardoned or paroled." Petitioner responded with the following answer: "Yes, criminal fine of $150.00, a total of $165.00 including court costs. Cannot be exact about charge since I can't specifically (sic) remember it." After receiving the application, respondent forwarded petitioner's fingerprint cards to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and requested a copy of petitioner's arrest record. That record reflected petitioner was arrested by the Wethersfield, Connecticut Police Department on October 18, 1980, for (a) second degree burglary, (b) conspiracy to commit second degree burglary, and (c) third degree larceny. The first two charges were ultimately dismissed and petitioner pled guilty to conspiracy to commit third degree larceny and paid a $150 fine plus $15 in court costs on November 5, 1981. Prior to receiving the arrest report, respondent apparently requested petitioner to furnish additional information concerning her answer to question In a letter dated November 2, 1982, petitioner responded that "(she) was arrested October of 1980, in Wethersfield, Connecticut", that "the matter was taken care of in New Britian Courts," and that the only documentation she had concerning the matter was enclosed. That was a one page receipt from the Superior Court, State of Connecticut, reflecting she had paid a $150 fine plus $15 court costs for a "criminal fine" on November 5, 1981. On January 27, 1983 respondent denied petitioner's application on the basis of her incomplete answer to question 6 and because her arrest record was an indication that she was not "honest, truthful, trustworthy, and of good character" and that she did not have a "good reputation for fair dealing." The letter of denial prompted the instant proceeding. Petitioner did not deny that her initial answer had been incomplete or that she had been arrested on various charges in 1980. She blamed the arrest incident on the fact that she happened to be in the same car with her husband when he was arrested for similar charges. Petitioner is unemployed at the present time. However, if she is successful in obtaining a real estate license, she intends to work for her mother who is active in the real estate business.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Carla B. Rosario for licensure as a real estate salesman be DENIED without prejudice to her submitting a new application at a later time. DONE and ENTERED this 15th day of August, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida. DONALD R. ALEXANDER 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 15th day of August, 1983.

Florida Laws (2) 120.57475.17
# 8
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. ALBERT R. HURLBERT, T/A HURLBERT REALTY, 84-003490 (1984)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 84-003490 Latest Update: Feb. 27, 1985

The Issue Whether the respondent's license as a real estate broker should be revoked, suspended, or otherwise disciplined because respondent entered a plea of guilty to the offense of unlawful compensation.

Findings Of Fact Respondent is and was at all times pertinent to this proceeding a licensed real estate broker with the State of Florida, holding license number 0166810. On June 18, 1982, an information was filed in the circuit court charging that between the dates of December 10, 1980 and December 1, 1981, the respondent "did corruptly request, solicit, accept or agree to accept money not authorized by law for past, present, or future performance, to wit: by sending business to Don's Alignment Shop, which said ALBERT RONALD HURLBERT did represent as having been within his official discretion in violation of a public duty or in performance of a public duty, in violation of Section 838.016, Florida Statutes." On July 16, 1982, the respondent appeared before Judge Thomas Oakley and entered a plea of guilty to the offense of unlawful compensation as charged in the information. Adjudication of guilt was withheld and respondent was placed on probation for a period of four years. Respondent was given an early release from probation on August 30, 1984.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Real Estate Commission enter an order finding that the respondent has been convicted or found guilty of a crime which involves moral turpitude or fraudulent or dishonest dealing and revoking the respondent's real estate license. DONE and ENTERED this 27th day of February, 1985, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE A. GRUBBS 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 27th day of February, 1985. COPIES FURNISHED: Fred Langford, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Mr. Albert R. Hurlbert c/o Hurlbert Realty 8117 Lakeland Street Jacksonville, Florida 32205 Salvatore A. Carpino, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Fred Roche, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Howard Huff Executive Director Division of Real Estate P. O. Box 1900 Orlando, FL 32802

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.25838.016
# 9

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