Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
RONALD CHARLES BROWN vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 88-001231 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-001231 Latest Update: Jan. 18, 1989

Findings Of Fact Petitioner is Ronald Charles Brown. By application dated September 16, 1987, he sought licensure as a real estate salesman. Question number six of the application completed by Petitioner requires a "yes" or "no" answer to 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 responded in the affirmative to question number six and disclosed that he was convicted in juvenile court of the offense of grand theft in Marion County, Florida in 1978; that he was charged with the offense of trespassing in 1982, which charge was subsequently dropped; and that he was charged with sale and possession of cocaine in Marion County in 1985. The court withheld adjudication of Petitioner's guilt of the drug sale and possession charge and placed him on probation for five years. By letter dated March 7, 1988, counsel for Respondent informed Petitioner of Respondent's intent to deny licensure to Petitioner on the basis of the 1978 grand theft conviction; a 1978 arrest and conviction for "hit and run" in Marion County; a 1978 arrest and conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a minor; and the 1985 cocaine sale and possession charge. In February of 1978, Petitioner was 17 years of age when, intoxicated by alcohol and drugs, he fell through a skylight into a jewelry store. He suffered minor cuts in the fall and remained lying on the floor at the scene until police, responding to a security alarm, arrived and took him into their custody. Petitioner was subsequently required to make restitution to the store for damages resulting from the incident in a Marion County, Florida, juvenile court proceeding. Petitioner reached his 18th birthday in May of 1978. He testified that in July of that year, he angrily backed out of the driveway of the residence of parents of a girl friend. In the process, he knocked over the parents' mailbox with the automobile he was driving. He went to his parents' home, obtained another mailbox and returned to install it at the residence of the girl friend's parents. Upon his arrival, he was met by law enforcement officials and arrested for "hit and run." A subsequent check by the officials disclosed his driver's license was invalid. The 16 year old girl friend, on a date undisclosed by the record but in close proximity to the mailbox incident, ran away from home to meet Petitioner at his parent's lake house in Marion County. Petitioner and she met there in the early evening. Her parents and law enforcement officials arrived that night. Petitioner was arrested and subsequently convicted of the offense of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. In 1985, Petitioner was arrested for sale and possession of cocaine. While the evidence fails to disclose Petitioner's plea to these charges, adjudication of guilt was withheld and Petitioner was placed on probation by the court. That probation was terminated July 19, 1988, by court order. At present, Petitioner is married. He and his wife have a small baby. He has been employed by a small chain of appliance stores for almost two years and now manages one of the stores. At the store managed by Petitioner, he exercises total control. He possesses the store keys, opens and closes the facility, oversees the inventory valued at approximately $300,000 and controls daily cash of approximately $5,000. He reports to a supervisor several miles away each morning to take and drive the delivery truck, loaded with products, to the store to which he Is assigned. Several informal inventories and one formal inventory have been performed at the store during the one year Petitioner has managed it and no losses have been noted. Petitioner denied he had ever sold cocaine; instead he insisted that his role was limited solely to that of being a delivery boy for other drug salespersons. He stated he has undertaken no specific drug rehabilitation program other than to discontinue involvement with controlled substances. In addition to his own testimony acknowledging and explaining his criminal record, he presented testimony regarding his character. Character witnesses consisted of Petitioner's mother and two other individuals. Both individuals testified they had known Petitioner only since February of 1986 or some point in time since the occurrence of his last criminal offense in 1985. Both individuals were impressed with Petitioner and indicated some knowledge, absence specific details, of his criminal background.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered denying Petitioner's application for licensure. DONE AND ENTERED this 18th day of January, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DON W. DAVIS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 18th day of January, 1989. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 88-1231 The following constitutes my specific rulings, in accordance with section 120.59, Florida Statutes, on findings of fact submitted by the parties. RESPONDENT'S PROPOSED FINDINGS 1.-8. Adopted in substance. COPIES FURNISHED: Ronald Charles Brown, pro se 9400 Monte Carlo Blvd. Fort Pierce, Florida 33451 Lawrence Gendzier, Esquire 400 West Robinson Street Room 212 Orlando, Florida 32801 Kenneth E. Easley, Esquire General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750 Darlene F. Keller, Division Director Real Estate Legal Services 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801

Florida Laws (1) 120.57
# 1
DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND TREASURER vs. GEORGE THOMAS DARBY, 83-000041 (1983)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 83-000041 Latest Update: Oct. 30, 1990

Findings Of Fact Respondent, George Thomas Darby, at all times relevant to these proceedings, was licensed as a professional bail bondsman and limited surety agent. The Respondent was previously licensed as an ordinary-combination life, including disability agent, but such license expired on March 30, 1981. On January 7, 1982, a grand jury indictment was issued in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Panama City Criminal Division, against the Respondent, George Thomas Darby. The indictment specifically charged that the Respondent: Did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate agree, and have a tacit understanding with other stated individuals to possess with the intent to distribute more than 1,000 pounds of the Schedule I control substance marijuana, in violation of Sections 841 and 846 of Title 21 of the United States Code. Did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate agree, and have a tacit understanding with other specified persons to import into the United States the Schedule I control substance marijuana in violation of Sections 952 and 963 of Title 21 of the United States Code. Did knowingly and intentionally import into the United States a Schedule I control substance in violation of Section 952 of Title 21 and Section 2 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Did knowingly and intentionally possess with the intent to distribute the Schedule I control substance marijuana in violation of Section 841 of Title 21 and Section 2 of Title 18 of the United States Code. On July 14, 1982, George Thomas Darby was convicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Panama City Criminal Division, as follows: Defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense of from on or about January, 1975, until the date of the indictment, in the Northern' District of Florida and elsewhere, knowingly combining, conspiring, and agreeing with others to import marijuana into the United States, in violation of Title 21, U.S. Code, Sections 952 and 963, as charged in Count 111(3) of the indictment. Pursuant to the above conviction, the Respondent, George Thomas Darby, was sentenced to a term of five years imprisonment and fined $15,000. The Respondent, by answer, admitted and further, at the formal hearing by stipulation, accepted as true the following facts: That you, George Thomas Darby, on or about July 14, 1982, in the United States District Court of the Northern District of Florida, in Case No. MCR 82-00203-07, were found guilty of knowingly combining, conspiring and agreeing with others to import marijuana into the United States, in violation of Title 21, U.S. Code, Sections 952, and 953, as charged in Count 111(3) of a previous grand jury indictment, Criminal Case No. MCR82-00203. The violation of either of the aforementioned titles is a felony as defined by Title 18, U.S.C. Section I(1). The Respondent has been licensed as a professional bail bondsman since October, 1976. His primary business as a bail bondsman has been in Jackson County, Florida. The Respondent has had no prior criminal convictions and no complaints or other disciplinary actions by the Department of Insurance against any license held by him from that Department. The Respondent has voluntarily ceased writing bail bonds since February of 1982, to the date of the hearing. Prior to the above-referenced conviction, the Respondent enjoyed a reputation as an honest, hardworking, and law-abiding citizen in the Jackson County area. On January 31, 1983, Clyde M. Taylor, Jr., Esquire, counsel for the Respondent in the above-referenced criminal action, filed an appellate brief in the United States Court of Appeal for the Eleventh Circuit on behalf of George Thomas Darby, seeking to reverse the July 14, 1982, district court conviction. At the time of the formal hearing, this appeal was pending.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Insurance enter a Final Order dismissing its Administrative Complaint against the Respondent, George Thomas Darby. DONE and ENTERED this 27th day of July, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida. COPIES FURNISHED: Clark R. Jennings, Esquire Department of Insurance Suite 413-B, Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Clyde M. Taylor, Jr., Esquire 1105 Hays Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Bill Gunter Insurance Commissioner and Treasurer The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 MARVIN E. CHAVIS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of July, 1983.

Florida Laws (8) 648.45775.08775.082775.083775.084777.04893.03893.13
# 2
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES vs VINCENT LAMONE ADDISON, 07-001175PL (2007)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Mar. 14, 2007 Number: 07-001175PL Latest Update: Sep. 20, 2007

The Issue Should discipline be imposed against Respondent's license as a limited surety agent for violation of Section 648.45(2)(a) (e), and (k), Florida Statutes (2006)?

Findings Of Fact On January 6, 2003, DFS issued Respondent a series 2-34 limited surety agent (bail bond) license. That license remains valid. On May 3, 2006, in State of Florida vs. Vincent Lamone Addison, in the Circuit Court, 14th Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, in and for Gulf County, Case No. 06-0107CF, Respondent was charged by information with: Count I, Possession with intent to sell/deliver within 1000 feet of place of worship or convenience business; Count II, Possession of marijuana in excess of 20 grams, offenses contrary to Section 893.13, Florida Statutes (2005), third degree felonies. In the same information, in Count III, it was charged that he did obstruct (an) officer without violence, a violation of Section 843.02, Florida Statutes (2005), a first degree misdemeanor. On December 18, 2006, the assistant state attorney in Circuit Court Case No. 06-107CF, filed a Motion to Consolidate, asking that the Court enter an order consolidating the count for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, with the count related to possession of more than 20 grams of marijuana. On December 19, 2006, in Circuit Court Case No. 06- 107CF, a Plea, Waiver and Consent was signed by Respondent as defendant in that case, attested by his counsel and the assistant state attorney, and found by the Circuit Court Judge to be a plea freely and voluntarily made and sworn to and subscribed before the court and approved and accepted by the court related to possession of marijuana, a third degree felony with a statutory maximum imprisonment of five years. The plea was made upon the agreement that the adjudication be withheld, with service of three-years' probation, to terminate after 18 months if all conditions were complete and no violations of the probation had occurred. In addition, by order of the Circuit Court Judge, certain charges/costs/fees were imposed in Circuit Court Case No. 06-107CF. When Respondent executed his Plea, Waiver and Consent in Circuit Court Case No. 06-107CF, it reflected that the charge of "Obstruct officer without violence" had been stricken by line and initials provided, by what appears to be the defense counsel and the assistant state attorney in the case. In Circuit Court Case No. 06-107CF, as reflected in an order by the Circuit Court Judge referring to those proceedings, entered December 19, 2006, upon his appearance before the Court with representation, it indicates a plea of nolo contendere was entered. It pertained to Count I. On the form order, it refers to "Sales/Del/Poss/cannis-w/in-100Ft. Church 893.13(1)(a) 3F." Under that reference is found "Poss. Marijuana in Excess 20 grs. 893.13(6)(a) 3F". The numbers refer to Section 893.13(1)(a) and (6)(a), Florida Statutes (2005), and "3F" refers to third degree felony. In this order it was reflected that the adjudication of guilt was withheld, and that the defendant received three-years' probation, to terminate after 18 months upon satisfaction of conditions of probation. The court order refers to fees required by the court to satisfy its terms for accepting the plea. On December 21, 2006, in Circuit Court Case No. 06- 107CF, the Circuit Court Judge entered an Order Withholding Adjudication of Guilt and Placing Defendant on probation. In this order it reflects entry of a plea of nolo contendere to the offense of "Possession of more than 20 grams, 3rd-Degree Felony," for which the Respondent received three years of probation. Other conditions of the probation were reflected in this order, to include the costs and fees imposed by the Court. On January 12, 2007, precisely the same order was entered by the Circuit Court Judge. In addition to the nolo contendere plea in Circuit Court Case No. 06-107CF, Respondent in his testimony at hearing in the present case, acknowledged that the drug offense took place in Port St. Joe, Florida. He was arrested on April 21, 2006. Respondent did not contest the charges because marijuana was found on the console of his car and some was in his front pocket. Respondent's understanding of his nolo contendere plea was that it was to possession of marijuana exceeding 20 grams. The amount was somewhere in the range of 118 to 120 grams. In the present case, Respondent through his testimony, explained that he had been diagnosed with lupus and that he smoked marijuana to help his body function while confronting his disease. Respondent is aware that possession of marijuana in Florida is illegal, even if intended for the purpose he had in mind to provide him relief from the pain of lupus. Respondent is not acting in the capacity of a bail bond agent at this time. That loss of income has had significant impact on his earning capacity. Mr. Tynalin Smiley, who resides in Port St. Joe where the Respondent lives, has known the Respondent from the time Respondent was born. They are good friends. Mr. Smiley belongs to the same church as Respondent. He visits in Respondent's home at times. He believes that Respondent is a respectable person in the community. Mr. Robert Humphrey, who resides in Dothan, Alabama, met Respondent in 1996 when Respondent did an internship from Troy State University. Mr. Humphrey and Respondent worked in the area of juvenile justice, going into schools and providing counseling to students. Over the years Mr. Humphrey has kept in contact with Respondent. Occasionally Mr. Humphrey and Respondent are together socially. They go out to dinner. Respondent has attended Mr. Humphrey's church. Mr. Humphrey looks upon himself as being a big brother to Respondent. Mr. Humphrey has observed that Respondent remains active in the Respondent's community. Mr. Humphrey believes that Respondent regrets his choice that led to the action against him, that involving the marijuana possession that has been discussed.

Recommendation Upon consideration of the facts found and the conclusions of law reached, it is RECOMMENDED: That a final order be entered Respondent in violation of Section 648.45(2)(a), (e) and (k), Florida Statutes (2006) and revoking Respondent's limited surety agent (bail bond) license. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of July, 2007, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S CHARLES C. ADAMS 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 27th day of July, 2007. COPIES FURNISHED: William Gautier Kitchen, Esquire Gregg Marr, Esquire Department of Financial Services Division of Legal Services 200 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333 Vincent Lamone Addition Post Office Box 483 Port St. Joe, Florida 32457 Honorable Alex Sink Chief Financial Officer Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Daniel Sumner, General Counsel Department of Financial Services The capitol, Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0307

Florida Laws (8) 120.569120.57648.25648.26648.34648.45843.02893.13
# 3
JAMES GREGORY BASARA vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, 09-006642 (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Dec. 08, 2009 Number: 09-006642 Latest Update: Jul. 14, 2010

The Issue Whether Petitioner's application for licensure as a resident company employee all lines adjuster should be granted.

Findings Of Fact The Department is the state agency responsible for licensing and regulation of insurance adjusters in the State of Florida pursuant to Chapter 626, Florida Statutes. On February 21, 1989, Petitioner was found guilty by a jury of aggravated assault, a felony, in the Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia, Case No. CP88-06-0164. The original sentence of probation entered November 13, 1989, was vacated on January 30, 1991. Petitioner was re-sentenced November 26, 1991, to not less than five and not more than ten years of imprisonment. The action taken in Pennsylvania is based on a criminal complaint that alleges Petitioner shot a police officer with a handgun, while the police officer was attempting to arrest him. On November 15, 2004, Petitioner pled nolo contendere to resisting an officer with violence, a felony, in the Circuit Court in and for St. Johns County, Florida, in Case No. 04001546CF. Adjudication was withheld and Petitioner was sentenced to a term of five years of probation. On July 1, 2009, Petitioner submitted to the Department an application for licensure as a resident company employee all lines insurance adjuster. The application included the following question: Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a felony under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? On the form submitted to the Department, Petitioner provides information related to an incident occurring June 13, 2003, in Saint Augustine, Florida, which presumably is related to the plea of nolo contendere in 2004, referenced in paragraph 3 above. The application does not divulge the Pennsylvania conviction. However, the Department conducts a background investigation on applicants, including a fingerprint check with both state and national law enforcement. Apparently, the Department requested additional information from Mr. Basara, and on August 20, 2009, he provided additional information regarding both the Pennsylvania and Florida crimes. With respect to the Pennsylvania crimes, Petitioner stated: In this paragraph I hope to outline the Pennsylvania charges. Over two decades ago on May 23, 1988, I was arrested and charged with things that I was not guilty of. I was twenty three years old. I do not claim to be completely innocent, but I was not guilty of the charges filed against me because there was no malicious intent on my part and my actions were in self defense. Never-the-less I accepted responsibility for my actions, was convicted and given probation by the judge. That same year I bought a home, got married, had my first daughter Amanda with my wife Barbara and went on to complete two years of the probationary sentence when I found out that the District Attorney had successfully appealed my probationary sentence. This required me to be re-sentenced to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. I appealed this "re-sentencing" and after 22 months I was successful. The Superior Court overruled the Lower Court and vacated my sentence completely. With agreement of the Appellate Superior Court, Common Pleas Judges, the District Attorney and myself we finally agreed on reduced charges and 5 years probation which was the "Final" final disposition. I completed all of the requirements with no problem and have gone on to live a productive and happy life since then. No documentation was submitted into evidence at hearing to support Petitioner's assertion that upon reversal of his sentence the second time, he pleaded guilty and was once again sentenced to probation.1/ On November 6, 2009, the Department issued a Notice of Denial, informing Respondent that denial of his application for licensure was based upon the criminal conviction in Pennsylvania and the plea of nolo contendere in St. Johns County, Florida. Based upon its interpretation of Florida Administrative Code rules establishing eligibility requirements, the Department determined his waiting period to apply for licensure to be 20 years from the date of the second felony, i.e., from the date he pled nolo contendere in St. Johns County.

Recommendation Upon consideration of the facts found and conclusions of law reached, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Financial Services enter a Final Order denying Petitioner's application for licensure as a resident company employee all lines adjuster, and establishing that his waiting period in terms of eligibility expires November 14, 2024. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of May, 2010, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S LISA SHEARER NELSON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of May, 2010.

Florida Laws (10) 120.56120.569120.57120.60626.171626.201626.207626.211626.611626.621 Florida Administrative Code (2) 69B-211.04169B-211.042
# 4
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION vs ANGELA D. COLEY, 90-001126 (1990)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Feb. 22, 1990 Number: 90-001126 Latest Update: Aug. 31, 1990

The Issue The issue in this case is whether the Respondent unlawfully and knowingly possessed a controlled substance and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken.

Findings Of Fact On July 3, 1986, the Respondent was certified by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, and was issued Certificate No. 03-86-502- 05. Later that year, the Respondent was employed as a Correctional Office at the Broward Correctional Institution. The Broward Correctional Institution is a state prison that houses female prisoners. The Respondent's duties included working inside the prison and working on the perimeter posts. While on perimeter post, the Correction Officers, including the Respondent, would sit in a small car with a loaded 12-guage shotgun and a .38 caliber revolver. The primary function of the perimeter post is to observe the fences of the prison to insure that there is no unauthorized entry into or exit from the prison. On several occasions the Respondent openly discussed with other Correctional Officers the fact that the Respondent used marijuana. On at least one occasion, the Respondent told another Correctional Officer that she (the Respondent) had reported for duty inside the prison with marijuana "joints" in her purse. On another occasion a Correctional Officer who relieved the Respondent on perimeter post smelled what seemed to be the odor of marijuana smoke and observed what appeared to be the remains of a marijuana cigarette. On yet another occasion the Respondent offered to provide marijuana to another Correctional Officer who worked on the same shift. One of the Correctional Officers who worked with the Respondent became concerned about what she had heard and seen regarding the Respondent's use of marijuana and reported her concerns to higher authority at the prison. As a result of such report, on the evening of November 16, 1989, two prison officials approached the Respondent during her break. At that time the Respondent was sitting in her personal vehicle in the prison parking lot. The prison officials requested and received permission to search the Respondent's vehicle. A Marlboro cigarette box containing what appeared to be a partially smoked, hand-rolled marijuana cigarette was found underneath the driver's seat of the Respondent's vehicle. The hand-rolled cigarette found in the Respondent's vehicle tested positive for marijuana. The Respondent was arrested on a charge of introduction of contraband into a state correctional institution. The Respondent later pled guilty and was found guilty of the lesser included charge of possession of marijuana, less that 20 grams.

Recommendation Based on all of the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission issue a final order in this case concluding that the Respondent is in violation of Section 943.13(7), Florida Statues, and Rule 11B- 27.0011(4), Florida Administrative Code, and imposing a penalty of revocation of the Respondent's certification. DONE AND ENTERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 31st day of August 1990. MICHAEL M. PARRISH 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 31st day of August 1990.

Florida Laws (3) 120.57943.13943.1395 Florida Administrative Code (1) 11B-27.0011
# 5
BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs. KATHLEEN ROLLINS SHUMNEY, 84-002944 (1984)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 84-002944 Latest Update: Jan. 10, 1986

Findings Of Fact Respondent is 37 years old. At all times material, she held a continuing contract of employment with the Broward County, Florida School Board. She has been a teacher for fourteen years and has been training in psychology to better her teaching skills and to become a counselor. At all times materials she was assigned by Petitioner School Board as a third grade teacher at Wilton Manors Elementary School. Respondent remained a third grade teacher on continuing contract until she was suspended without pay from her duties at the close of the workday on April 14, 1984. Effective February 2, 1984, Respondent entered upon formal disability leave with full approval of her principal and the Petitioner School Board. Representations by Petitioner's Counsel that the foregoing problems and disability leave was drug related is not evidence and there is no competent substantial evidence admitted at formal hearing to establish a relationship between Respondent's February 2, 1984 request for disability leave and drug dependency. Respondent's testimony by way of deposition is that she sought disability leave for an anxiety problem. A medical report attached to this deposition reveals that she was hospitalized for depressive reaction from February IS to February 19, 1984. Respondent had previously received therapy in connection with a divorce in 1979. On or about March 2; 1984, Respondent was living at 1421 South Ocean Boulevard Apartment 406, in Pompano Beach, Florida. She shared this apartment from 1983 until that date with Tony Trevathan and her brother. The apartment lease was not in her name. Respondent knew at least two other people who had keys to the apartment besides herself. She also felt the manager, the manager's wife, and various repairmen had had keys. Edward C. Wolff, a police officer for the City of Pompano Beach, was working with officer Canner during the night shift of March 2, 1984, and was called to the residence of the Respondent on that evening with reference to a disturbance call. At approximately 1:30 a.m., the police officers arrived in the lobby of Respondent's apartment complex, and came into contact with Mr. Trevathan. He identified himself as one of the people they were there to see, so Officer Canner talked to him in the lobby while Officer Wolff went up to the apartment. When Officer Wolff knocked on the apartment door, he identified himself as a police officer of the City of Pompano Beach and stated that he was there for a disturbance call. At first Respondent questioned his identity but after verification from the Pompano Beach Police Department she invited Officer Wolff into the apartment to talk about the problem. Respondent directed Officer Wolff to have a seat at a table located in a joint living and family room, and she sat directly across from him. While Officer Wolff was talking to Respondent he observed a clear plastic baggie on the table about one and a half feet directly in front of him. Inside the bag was a large number of white tablets. Based on his training, education, and experience as a police officer with specialized training in narcotics; he surmised that the tablets were methaqualone tablets which a later laboratory report confirmed to be the case. After Officer Wolff saw the bag with the methaqualone tablets he continued to seek information related to the disturbance call. The Respondent appeared to him to be impaired. She was unsteady on her feet and began a second sentence before finishing a previous sentence. Officer Wolff noted that there was no smell of an alcohol beverage on her breath. He felt her behavior was consistent with people who are taking cocaine or methaqualones. Officer Wolff looked at the tablets and noticed that they were marked "Lemon 714," which in his experience is a common designator for methaqualone tablets. At that point he took physical control of the tablets and advised Respondent that she was being detained for further investigation due to the narcotics he found. He radioed Officer Canner to tell him to bring Mr. Trevathan upstairs and informed him of the possible narcotics violations. Officer Wolff counted a total of sixty-seven (67) tablets in the baggie. From where he stood, officer Wolff could see clearly into the kitchen area. He saw a brown woman's shoulder bag on the counter. He testified that there were several white plastic baggies sticking out of the bag. As Officer Wolff approached the bag to look closer and determine what the white powder was, Respondent exclaimed, That's my bag". Officer Wolff removed the baggies from the purse. There were a total of eleven baggies which appeared to be filled with cocaine, which a later laboratory report confirmed to be the case. Respondent maintained that the brown bag was not a shoulder bag but a molded bag which she had thrown in the kitchen trash can earlier in the day. She stated that when she discarded it the bag was empty; but there is apparently no dispute concerning what was found in it by Officer Wolff. On top of a stove, approximately three to four feet away from the purse Officer Wolff found a couple of other clear plastic baggies that had white powdery residue which later tested as cocaine. On top of a dresser in the bedrooms Officer Wolff saw a single tablet which appeared to be the same colors shape, and form of methaqualone tablets that he had already taken. That tablet tested as methaqualone. Respondent admits that this had been her bedroom up until the day in question but that she was in the process of moving out throughout the day. She testified she had not cooked in the kitchen for a week and had slept in the living room for a week on the sofa. She had packed clothes in the bedroom earlier in the day. Officer Wolff observed the make-up mirror in the bathroom area that had a Publix check cashing card along with some white powder on it. He took the mirror and saw that the Publix check cashing card was in the name of Kathy R. Shumney. This powder subsequently tested as cocaine. Officer Wolff asked Mr. Trevathan if he was aware of the drugs and the response was in the affirmative. He did not ask Respondent and Mr. Trevathan's statement is not construed as an admission against interest by her. He then arrested Respondent and Mr. Trevathan for possession of narcotics i.e. controlled substances. Detective Deborah Pollack, the Identification Technician for the Pompano Beach Police Department, arrived at the scene in response to Wolff's radio call and was instructed to take pictures throughout the apartment. She took a total of eight pictures (Petitioner's Composite 5A through H) which portrayed the substances in their places of discovery the two persons arrested, and the general condition of the apartment. Officer Pollack testified that she arrived on the scene at approximately 1:41 a.m. Except that the first baggie had been replaced on the table the photographs substantially support Officer Wolff's testimony. Respondent testified that she had packed most of her belongings to leave the apartment for good earlier in the day. She then went to the Galleria Mall with Tony Trevathan to buy clothes. She had been in the apartment about 15 minutes when Officer Wolff arrived. At that time Trevathan was, so far as Respondent knew, removing packages of purchases from his car. The photographs by Officer Pollack confirmed that packing, unpacking, or heavy cleaning had been going on. On March 30, 1984, Respondent presented herself to Dr. Daniel H. Goldwin, M.D. Between that day and her release on April 4, 1984 she underwent urinalysis and a number of other tests which resulted in a diagnosis of anxiety, depressions and increased alcohol abuse, but she tested as having no narcotics in her system. In giving her medical history to this doctors Respondent admitted trying cocaine on occasion, but saying it made her nervous. These tests were approximately 30 days after the arrest for drug possession. Linda Marable has been Principal at Wilton Manors Elementary School for five years and supervised Respondent during the 1983-1984 school term. It is not clear whether she had observed or supervised Respondent before that term. She testified that in her opinion, Respondent's effectiveness as a teacher would be impaired as a result of the charges lodged against her because the community and faculty are aware of the drug charges lodged against Respondent due to newspaper reports. Some children in the school also had mentioned it to Principal Marable. Ronald Steven Wright, Petitioner's Director of Non- instructional Personnel, also testified that Respondent's effectiveness was impaired but Mr. Wright's opinion, backed by no specific predicate of what opportunity he has had to examine the knowledge and the reactions of others in the educational community, is not of significant weight. Both Mr. Wright and Ms. Marable conceded that innocence of the charges would affect their opinions. Neither educator felt arrest without proof of wrongdoing should be the controlling factor in effectiveness. However, Ms. Marable felt the mere notoriety of the arrest would be significant on a case by case basis. On April 24, 1984, Linda Kay Marable, Principal of Wilton Manors Elementary School, reported to Petitioner's "Personnel Services" that four months before, on 11/01/83 and 11/02/83, Respondent was tardy in arriving at school. How late after 8:00 a.m. Respondent arrived was not established by any competent evidence in the record. She also reported on that date that on 11/29/83 Respondent was absent and did not call for a substitute until 7:45 a.m., which was considered "late" pursuant to establishment of the official school day. In connection with the foregoing Respondent had received a memorandum dated November 30, 1983 advising her that further such situations would result in formal charges of dismissal for "willful neglect of duties". Principal Marable also reported on April 24, 1984, that on some occasion not specified Respondent had been late in handing in lesson plans that her students' papers were not graded, that the MBS test was not up-to-dated and that Respondent had an above average number of problems with classroom control. The record reveals no specificity of date or incident being proved-up for these problems. The principal further reported to "Personnel Services" that Respondent was tardy in arriving at school after 8:00 a.m., on 2/02/84, but how late Respondent arrived was never established. Until Respondent was subsequently arrested on March 2, 1984 for drug possession, none of these earlier problems were reported to Petitioner. The April 24, 1984, Memorandum of Report mentioned these incidents and drug charges together and recommended either not rehiring Respondent for the next term (1984- 1985) or returning her to annual contract. Respondent has never been formally charged with unsatisfactory performance except as it might relate to her arrest on March 2, 1984. Petitioner has urged a number of proposed findings of fact based upon a plea to certain criminal charges lodged against Respondent arising out of the March 2, 1984 arrest, which plea was entered June 22, 1984. For the reasons set forth in the following conclusions of law the undersigned rejects these proposals and specifically makes no findings of fact in connection with that plea. By a letter to the Hearing Officer filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings September 12, 1985, which at Respondent's request has been deemed a Motion for Rehearing, Respondent represented that she did not attend the formal hearing in this cause on June 17, 1985 because she "was a patient at Humana Hospital Biscayne in the Alcohol and Substance Abuse Program." As a pleading this letter/motion is part of the record herein.

Recommendation Accordingly, upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is , RECOMMENDED: That the School Board of Broward County, Florida enter a Final Order rescinding its suspension without pay of Respondent, reinstating her as a continuing contract teacher as part of its instructional personnel, and reinstating all back pay and benefits subject to any appropriate mitigation by consideration of disability leave or physical inability to work. DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of January, 1986, in Tallahassee, Florida. ELLA JANE P. DAVIS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of January, 1986.

Florida Laws (3) 1.0190.41090.610
# 6
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION vs. MELVIN J. SIMMONS, 86-002937 (1986)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 86-002937 Latest Update: Apr. 21, 1987

The Issue The issue is whether the correctional officer certificate of Melvin J. Simmons should be revoked for lack of good moral character due to having sexual relations with an inmate in the Palm Beach County Jail where Mr. Simmons was employed?

Findings Of Fact Melvin J. Simmons was issued a certificate as a correctional officer by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission on May 30, 1984, certificate 44-84-502-02. In February 1985, Mr. Simmons and Lidia Gonzalez were employed as correctional officers at the Palm Beach County Jail. Both had attended the Police Academy in the same class. In February 1985, Pearline Bartee was incarcerated at the jail. As a trustee, Ms. Bartee was able to move about the jail. Ms. Gonzalez worked in the watchtower at the jail. Simmons approached her to have her arrange a meeting between himself and Bartee in the enclosed stairwell between the first and second floors of the jail. Women inmates were housed on those two floors. Simmons told Gonzalez that he wanted the meeting to engage in sex with Bartee. Simmons asked Gonzalez to warn him through the intercom system in the watchtower and stairwell if a supervisor approached the stairwell while Simmons and Bartee were together there. Simmons had two meetings with Bartee in the stairwell and thanked Gonzalez for looking out for him. On both occasions Simmons had sex with Bartee in the stairwell. Sergeant Michael Tucker of the staff investigation unit of the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department investigated a rumor that correctional officers had engaged in sex with female inmates. During the course of the investigation, Tucker received information that Simmons may have been involved in misconduct. On April 23, 1987, Sergeant Tucker and a polygraphist, Aaron Saylor, interviewed Simmons about the allegations of sexual misconduct. Simmons initially denied the allegations and grew increasingly nervous during the interview. Due to Simmons' demeanor, Tucker told Simmons that he doubted Simmons' truthfulness and was asked to submit to a polygraph examination. Respondent then admitted that he had engaged in intercourse with Bartee in the stairwell on three occasions in February 1985. Sexual contact between correctional officers and inmates is inconsistent with the employment practice of the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That certificate 44-84-502-02 issued to Melvin J. Simmons be REVOKED. DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of April, 1987, in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM R. DORSEY, JR. Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 21st day of April, 1987. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 86-2937 All proposed findings of fact have been adopted except Finding of Fact 9 relating to rumors that inmate Bartee may have become pregnant. In light of the evidence that Ms. Bartee, herself, told correctional officer Gonzalez that Bartee was not pregnant, there is no record basis for such a finding. COPIES FURNISHED: Joseph S. White, Esquire Florida Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Mr. Melvin J. Simmons 1412 West 7th Street Riviera Beach Florida 33404 Marzell Mitchell, Jr., Esquire Harvey Building, Suite 413 224 Datura Street West Palm Beach Florida 33401 Rod Caswel1, Director Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Robert R. Dempsey, Executive Director Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Florida Laws (3) 120.57943.13943.1395
# 7
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION vs LORETTA L. SCOTT, 97-004250 (1997)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tampa, Florida Sep. 10, 1997 Number: 97-004250 Latest Update: Jul. 23, 1998

The Issue The issue to be determined in this case is whether Respondent, a certified correctional officer, committed the offenses alleged in the Administrative Complaint, and if so, what discipline or penalty is appropriate.

Findings Of Fact Petitioner, Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission (Commission), is the agency of the State of Florida vested with the statutory authority pursuant to Section 943.1395, Florida Statutes, to certify the employment of correctional officers. Respondent, Loretta L. Scott, is a certified correctional officer holding certificate number 157788 issued by the Commission. At all times material to the allegations of the Administrative Complaint, Respondent was employed, and on duty as a correctional officer at the North Florida Reception Center (NFRC), a correctional facility of the DOC. On July 15, 1995, an incident of prisoner abuse occurred at NFRC involving the striking of an inmate, John Graham, by Corrections Captain Bailes during a formation of the inmates in the yard. The day of the incident was Respondent's first day on duty as an officer trainee at NFRC. Respondent was assigned to the team of officers on duty in the NFRC yard at the time of the incident. At some time prior to the incident, Respondent had left the yard for a short while to use the bathroom. After the incident, inmate Graham was escorted from the yard to the NFRC hospital by Captain Bailes and other correctional officers. Respondent was present and in the immediate area of the yard during the course of the incident, and assisted in escorting inmate Graham to the hospital. On or about July 27, 1995, Respondent was twice questioned under oath by Inspector Keith Adams concerning the incident of abuse of inmate Graham. The transcripts of the interviews were admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit 3. Respondent denied witnessing the striking of inmate Graham by Captain Bailes, and initially denied accompanying inmate Graham to the NFRC hospital; however, during the afternoon interview on July 27, 1995, Respondent stated that she assisted in accompanying inmate Graham to the NFRC hospital. Respondent again testified at hearing that she was not present on the NFRC yard, and did not observe the incident of abuse of inmate Graham, but may have been one of the officers accompanying inmate Graham to the hospital. Establishing the witnesses to the incident of prisoner abuse was a material aspect of the investigation conducted by the DOC into this matter. Respondent was not candid and forthcoming in her interviews with Inspector Adams. Respondent was part of the team of officers on the NFRC yard at the time of the incident and was observed on the yard during the time of the incident by several witnesses. While Respondent may have been away from the NFRC yard for a short period of time on July 15, 1995, Respondent was clearly present and accompanied inmate Graham to the NFRC hospital where other matters significant to the internal investigation occurred. Respondent's disclaimer of any material knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the incident of abuse of inmate Graham is not consistent with the evidence of record, and constituted a material misrepresentation to the investigating officer. As indicated above, July 15, 1995, was Respondent's first day on duty in the yard. She had not completed her training and was inexperienced as a corrections officer. The incident of prisoner abuse, which occurred on July 15, 1995, involved a high-ranking corrections officer, and resulted in significant internal personnel ramifications at NFRC.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission enter a final order suspending Respondent's certificate for a period not to exceed one year. DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of January, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. RICHARD HIXSON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUMCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 30th day of January, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: Mark P. Brewer, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1489 Loretta L. Scott, pro se 4360 Outrigger Lane Tampa, Florida 33615 A. Leon Lowry, II, Director Division of Criminal Justice Standards & Training Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Michael Ramage, Esquire Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Florida Laws (3) 120.57943.13943.1395 Florida Administrative Code (2) 11B-27.001111B-27.005
# 8
CHARLES J. DICK vs DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF LICENSING, 91-000365 (1991)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Jan. 16, 1991 Number: 91-000365 Latest Update: Jun. 21, 1991

Findings Of Fact On August 10, 1990, Petitioner filed an application for licensure with the Respondent as a Class "CC" Private Investigator Intern and as a Class "EE" Repossessor Intern. On January 8, 1991, Respondent notified Petitioner, in an amended denial letter, that his application for licensure had been denied. The grounds for the denial were based on Petitioner's alleged violations of Section 493.6118(1)(j), Florida Statutes, on two separate occasions. On June 11, 1982, the Petitioner and Donald Olkewicz became engaged in an altercation in Pompano Beach, Florida. Petitioner fired a 12 gauge flare gun through the screened apartment window of Mr. Olkewicz and later, in the parking lot of the apartment complex, Petitioner again discharged the flare gun which resulted in injuries to the face of Mr. Olkewicz. Petitioner was not acting in self-defense. Petitioner was arrested by Officer R. D. Cracraft who detected the odor of alcohol on the Petitioner and on Mr. Olkewicz. On July 1, 1982, an Information was filed against Petitioner in the Circuit Court in and for Broward County, Florida, for the felony charges of (1) Discharging a firearm into an occupied dwelling and of (2) aggravated battery. The charges contained in this Information were assigned Case No. 82-6213 CF10. On April 15, 1983, Petitioner entered a plea of nolo contendere in Case No. 82-6213 CF10 to the charge of aggravated battery. 1/ On June 3, 1982, an order was entered by the Circuit Court in and for Broward County, Florida, withholding adjudication of guilt on the charge of aggravated battery and placing Petitioner on probation for a period of four years. Petitioner's term of probation was terminated early due to his good behavior. On July 30, 1988, in Palm Beach County, Florida, Officer Edward T. Sileo of the Boca Raton Police Department was dispatched to Petitioner's apartment to supervise the removal of personal items by Petitioner's ex- girlfriend, Marie Rochay. Officer Sileo escorted Ms. Rochay from the parking lot to the apartment, and upon opening the door saw Petitioner standing in the hallway with a spear gun pointed at the door. Petitioner dropped the spear gun upon seeing Officer Sileo. Petitioner and Ms. Rochay began to argue and at some point Petitioner accidentally hit Officer Sileo in the chest and indicated in a profane manner that he wanted Officer Sileo to leave the premises. When Ms. Rochay began removing her clothes from a walk-in closet, Petitioner began to argue with her and attempted to keep her from leaving by physically restraining her. When Officer Sileo stepped in to separate Petitioner and Ms. Rochay Petitioner began to wrestle with Officer Sileo. Petitioner physically resisted Officer Sileo after being advised that he was under arrest. Petitioner was not acting in self-defense. There was no evidence that Petitioner was criminally prosecuted based on this incident. At the time of the formal hearing, Petitioner was employed by Marine Recovery International. Mr. Joe Dinardo, the owner, testified that he considered Petitioner to be a valuable employee, and of good moral character. Marine Recovery International is willing to sponsor Petitioner's application and to supervise him during his internship. Petitioner was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army on June 11, 1982. Petitioner is licensed by the United States Coast Guard as a Merchant Marine Officer with the designation "Master of Near Coastal Steam or Motor Vessels of Not More Than 100 Gross Tons" and is a member in good standing of the American Professional Captains Association, an organization for U.S. Coast Guard Licensed Captains. Petitioner presented several letters from individuals who know him and who consider him to be responsible, professional, and of good moral character. These letters recommend licensure for Petitioner.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered which denies Petitioner's application for licensure as a Class "CC" Private Investigator Intern and as a Class "EE" Repossessor Intern. DONE AND ORDERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 21st day of June, 1991. CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON 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 21st day of June, 1991.

Florida Laws (2) 120.57493.6118
# 9
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF LICENSING vs EDWARD W. SALVATO, 94-000143 (1994)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Orlando, Florida Jan. 10, 1994 Number: 94-000143 Latest Update: Aug. 16, 1994

Findings Of Fact The Petitioner, Department of State, Division of Licensing, licenses and regulates private investigators in Florida. The Respondent, Edward W. Salvato, is licensed in Florida as a Class C private investigator. On August 31, 1993, while working in his capacity as a private investigator, the Respondent was monitoring the movements of a subject who entered Sea World in Orlando, Florida. As he entered Sea World, the Respondent hurriedly "flashed" his Class C private investigator license credentials and told the admissions gate attendant that he was a "state investigator" who was following a subject into the park. He told the attendant that, under those circumstances, he normally does not have to purchase a ticket. The Respondent's gestures and words gave the gate attendant the impression that the Respondent was a law enforcement investigator with official status. The gate attendant was new on the job and was unsure how to handle the situation. She referred the Respondent to a supervisor. The Respondent repeated essentially the same gestures and words to the supervisor. Understanding from the Respondent's gestures and words that the Respondent was a law enforcement investigator with official status, the supervisor authorized the Respondent to enter the park without having to purchase a ticket. Before he left the park, the Respondent telephoned his employer and reported on his activities. The employer advised the Respondent that it was against the employer's policies for the Respondent to seek free admission to Sea World under the conditions described by the Respondent. The employer instructed the Respondent to purchase a ticket and get a receipt for reimbursement by the Respondent's client. Before leaving Sea World, the Respondent proceeded to the "Special Services" window to purchase a ticket and get a receipt. He also told "Special Services" that he was a "state investigator." Subsequent misunderstandings resulted in the Respondent being arrested by Sea World security guards. When a law enforcement officer responded to a call from Sea World, the Respondent also told the officer that he was a "state investigator." The officer cautioned him that his use of the term "state investigator" to describe himself could lead one to believe he was a law enforcement officer. He advised the Respondent to stop using the term to describe himself to members of the public. Evenually, the Respondent's admission to the park was paid.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that the Department of State, Division of Licensing, enter a final order finding the Respondent, Edward W. Salvato, guilty of violating Section 493.6118(1)(i), Fla. Stat. (1993), and fining him $500. RECOMMENDED this 29th day of June, 1994, in Tallahassee, Florida. J. LAWRENCE JOHNSTON 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 29th day of June, 1994. COPIES FURNISHED: Richard R. Whidden, Jr., Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of State The Capitol, MS #4 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Edward W. Salvato, pro se 1051 South Hiawassee Road, #2121 Orlando, Florida 32835 Hon. Jim Smith Secretary of State The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Phyllis Slater, Esquire General Counsel Department of State The Capitol, PL-02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

Florida Laws (1) 493.6118
# 10

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