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
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
The Issue Whether Respondent is guilty of obtaining a license by means of fraud, misrepresentation or concealment, in violation of Section 475.25(1)(m), Florida Statutes (1995).
Findings Of Fact Petitioner is a state licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida. Respondent is and was at all times material to this proceeding a licensed Florida Real Estate Salesperson. He was issued licensed number 0625149 in accordance with Chapter 475, Florida Statutes. His license is currently inactive. On or about April 6, 1995, Respondent submitted an application for licensure as a Real Estate Salesperson. Question number 9 on the application read as follows: 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? This question applies to violation of the laws of any municipality, county, state or nation, including traffic offenses (but not parking, speeding, inspection, or traffic signal violations), without regard to whether you were placed on probation, had adjudication withheld, paroled, or pardoned. If you intend to answer "NO" because you believe those records have been expunged or sealed by court order pursuant to Section 943.058, Florida Statutes, or applicable law of any other state, you are responsible for verifying the expungement or sealing prior to answering "NO". If you answered "Yes," attach details including dates and outcome, including sentence and conditions imposed, in full on a separate sheet of paper. Your answer to this question will be checked against local, state and federal records, Failure to answer this question accurately could cause denial of licensure. If you do not understand the question, consult with an attorney or the Division of Real Estate. Respondent marked the "NO" box beside question number 9. Respondent then signed the "Affidavit of Applicant" which read above his signature: The above named, and undersigned, applicant for licensure as a real estate salesperson under the provisions of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes, as amended, upon being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)(he) is the person applying, that (s)(he) has carefully read the application, answers, and the attached statements, if any, and that all such answers and statements are true and correct, and are as complete as his/her knowledge, information and recollection permit, without any evasions or mental reservations whatsoever, that (s)(he) knows of no reason why this application should be denied; and (s)(he) further extends this affidavit to cover all amendments to this application or further statements to the Division or its representatives, by him/her in response to inquiries concerning his/her qualifications. On or about July 6, 1989, Respondent, going by the name of Pablo Alfaro, pled no contest to misdemeanor "joyriding" in Case No. 93CM04225, in Santa Ana, California. Respondent admitted to pleading no contest to a "joyriding” charge. By letter dated August 27, 1997, addressed to Petitioner, Respondent's employer at the time, John Maizie, Executive Sales Director of Cypress Pointe Resort, wrote that Respondent was an ethical and valued employee.
Recommendation Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent be found guilty of violating Section 475.25(1)(m), Florida Statutes, as charged in the Administrative Complaint, and that Respondent's license should be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of November, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE 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 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 3rd day of November, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: Laura McCarthy, Chief Deputy Attorney Department of Business and Professional Regulation 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801-1772 Juan Bonitto 2851 Runyon Circle Orlando, Florida 32837-5214 Henry M. Solares, Division Director Division of Real Estate Department of Business and Professional Regulation Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802-1900 Lynda L. Goodgame, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792
The Issue The issue in this proceeding is whether the Petitioner meets the qualifications for licensure as a real estate salesman and should be allowed to sit for the examination for licensure which is administered by the Florida Real Estate Commission.
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner is a natural person over eighteen years of age and is a bona fide resident of the State of Florida. Except for issues raised with respect to Petitioner's being convicted of a crime in 1972, there is no issue as to Petitioner's eligibility to take the examination for licensure as a real estate salesman. During July, 1972, Petitioner was convicted in Federal Court in Virginia of mail fraud. The conviction was based upon a guilty plea. A three- year prison sentence was imposed with all but sixty days of the sentence suspended. Petitioner served sixty days in a maximum security federal penitentiary. Petitioner's civil rights in the State of Virginia were restored in 1976. Petitioner has not been convicted of any other crimes. Prior to his conviction, Petitioner was an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Virginia. The Petitioner's conviction related to the trust account that the Petitioner maintained in connection with his law practice. Petitioner resigned from the Bar in Virginia after his conviction. Petitioner has been licensed to practice as a real estate salesman in the State of Virginia for the past thirty years. Officials in Virginia made an effort to suspend or revoke his license, but the Petitioner was successful in pursuing judicial remedies until sufficient time had lapsed after his conviction, and under Virginia law he was eligible for licensure. The Petitioner has practiced real estate in Virginia since his conviction. The Petitioner enjoys a very good reputation for honesty, truthfulness, and trustworthiness in business communities in Virginia and Orlando, Florida. He has the reputation amongst business and personal associates of being of good character, and he enjoys a good reputation for fair dealing. It appears that the interests of the public and of investors would not be likely to be endangered if the Petitioner is licensed as a real estate salesman in Florida. A licensed broker is prepared to hire the Petitioner as a salesman if the Petitioner is licensed, and it appears that the Petitioner would faithfully and honestly represent clients. The Petitioner neither denies nor minimizes the significance of his criminal conviction. He forthrightly advised the Real Estate Commission of the conviction in his application for licensure. He was candid in discussing details about it at the hearing. The Petitioner realizes the magnitude of the offense and is remorseful. The Petitioner has fully rehabilitated himself, as evidenced by the passage of a long period of time and the fact that he now enjoys a very good reputation in business and professional communities in Virginia and Florida.
The Issue The issues in this cause are those promoted by the administrative complaint brought by the Petitioner against Respondent alleging a violation of Section 475.25(1)(f), Florida Statutes, through the entry of a plea of nolo contendere to a charge of vehicular homicide, a felony, as described in Section 782.071, Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner, as a governmental agency in the State of Florida, licenses and regulates those persons who are engaged in real estate sales within Florida. The authority for this regulatory function may be found in Section 20.30, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 120, 455 and 475, Florida Statutes, and associated rules. Respondent has held a real estate salesman's license issued by the Petitioner during all relevant periods. On September 13, 1986, that license held by the Respondent was inactive. On October 13, 1986, Respondent activated his real estate salesman's license and it remained active at the point of final hearing. In October 1986, Respondent placed his real estate sales license with a real estate broker in Gainesville, Florida, Richard Fort Rogers. Richard Fort Rogers is the father of the Respondent. Respondent continues in his affiliation with his father's real estate brokerage operation. On September 13, 1987, Respondent was involved in an automobile accident in Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida. He was operating the motor vehicle in question and through that operation caused the death of Harold E. Thompson. Out of these circumstances, Respondent entered a plea of nolo contendere to the offense of vehicular homicide. Section 782.071, Florida Statutes. This disposition is set forth in Petitioner's composite exhibit 2 admitted into evidence. The plea was by negotiation in the case The State of Florida vs. Richard Fort Rogers in the Circuit Court, for the 8th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Alachua County, Court, #86-3203-CF-A. The amended information to which the Petitioner pled dates from December 10, 1986. The negotiated plea was entered on February 2, 1987. On that same date the Court entered an order accepting the plea. For this offense, adjudication of guilt was withheld, the Respondent was given three years' probation, required to pay court costs and was screened for alcohol counseling. Following the disposition of his case, by correspondence of February 13, 1987, as received by the Florida Real Estate Commission on February 17, 1987, Respondent advised the Commission of his plea of nolo contendere to the charge of vehicular homicide.
Findings Of Fact On October 3, 1975, Respondent filed an application with Petitioner for registration as a real estate broker (Stipulation, Petitioner's Exhibit 2). That said application contained therein Question 8 which is set forth in paragraph 2 of the Amended Complaint and to which Respondent answered "No." (Stipulation, Petitioner's Exhibit 2.) That thereafter the application was approved and the Respondent subsequently received his registration as a real estate broker and has been continuously registered the Petitioner as a broker since December 22, 1975 (Stipulation.) That at the time of the execution of the application, as aforesaid, Respondent'S answer to Question 8 was incorrect in that he failed to reveal, disclose and fully explain a Complaint filed against him on August 6, 1973, in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, in and for Pinellas County, by one Kenneth Beard, an individual, which complaint alleges false representations on the part of the Respondent in a business transaction. A judgment of the aforesaid Circuit Court in the above-mentioned action was in the process of appeal at the time Respondent filed his application for registration as a real estate broker (stipulation.) Respondent testified at the hearing substantially as follows: After the civil action had been filed against him, he sought the advice of counsel who informed him that the complaint therein was defective as a matter of law. He was therefore of the opinion that there was not a viable suit against him at the time he filled out his application, and thus was not attempting to mislead or hide any facts from the Petitioner. He also felt that, since he had not, in fact, committed any fraud or misrepresented any matters to the purchaser of the business in question, a negative answer on the question in the application was justified. However, upon reflection at the hearing, he conceded that, probably he had misread the question and misconstrued its meaning. Respondent's good reputation for truth and veracity in the community and in his business dealings was attested to by past officials of the Clearwater, Largo, Dunedin Board of Realtors (Testimony of Merhige, Blanton).
Recommendation That the Complaint against Respondent, William D. Folz, be dismissed. DONE and ENTERED this 5th day of April, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. THOMAS C. OLDHAM Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Frederick W. Jones Staff Counsel Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road Winter Park, Florida 32789 Richard B. Moritz, Esquire 801 West Bay Drive Suite 704 Largo, Florida 33540
Findings Of Fact The Respondent, Leonard Fernandez, is a licensed real estate salesman, holding license number 0145203. In July and August of 1979, the Respondent was employed as a mortgage solicitor for Southeast Mortgage Company in Broward County, Florida. Alan Edwards was the Respondent's supervisor during this time period. In July, 1979, the Respondent advised Alan Edwards that he was going to purchase property, and requested that Mr. Edwards loan him money for a short period of time. Mr. Edwards loaned the Respondent $4,000 under a verbal agreement that the Respondent would repay the loan within 60 days. When the Respondent failed to repay this loan as agreed, Mr. Edwards had the Respondent sign a promissory note in the amount of $4,000. In an attempt to repay a portion of this note, the Respondent gave Mr. Edwards a check in the amount of $1,800 on or about August 29, 1979. Mr. Edwards presented the check for payment, but it was returned unpaid because the Respondent had stopped payment on it. When Mr. Edwards contacted the Respondent about the check, the Respondent stated that he had expected some funds from a relative, and when he did not receive this money, he stopped payment on the check. The Respondent told Mr. Edwards that he would give him a cashier's check to replace the $1,800 check that had been returned unpaid, but the Respondent never provided the cashier's check. Instead, the Respondent, in September, 1979, gave Mr. Edwards several postdated checks drawn on account number 002312352 at Southeast Bank of Broward County. The purpose of these checks was to repay, the $1,800, after which the Respondent was to pay the remaining debt due under the note. In November, 1979, Mr. Edwards presented the first of the postdated checks, dated November 15, 1979, to Southeast Bank for payment, but was notified that the Respondent's account upon which all the postdated checks had been issued, was closed. When the bank failed to honor this first check, Mr. Edwards sent a notice of dishonored check to the Respondent by certified mail. The return receipt indicates that the Respondent received this notice. In December, 1979, and in January and February of 1980, Mr. Edwards presented to Southeast Bank the postdated checks that Respondent had given him for these months. On each occasion the bank informed Mr. Edwards that the Respondent's account was closed. Mr. Edwards sent the Respondent notices of dishonor of these checks, which the Respondent received. Mr. Edwards never received any payment of the debt owed by the Respondent. On January 7, 1980, in Dade County Circuit Court, the Respondent pled nolo contendere to two counts of conspiracy to sell, deliver or possess with intent to sell or deliver, cocaine, and was found guilty, placed on one year probation, and ordered to pay $2,400 in restitution. On February 29, 1980, the court withheld adjudication on this charge.
Recommendation From the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that license number 0145203 held by the Respondent, Leonard Fernandez, be revoked. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 9th day of June, 1983 in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM B. THOMAS 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 9th day of June, 1983. COPIES FURNISHED: Tina Hipple, Esquire Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Mr. Leonard Fernandez 10024 S.W. 2nd Terrace Miami, Florida 33174 William M. Furlow, Esquire Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Harold Huff, Executive Dir. Florida Real Estate Commission Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802
Findings Of Fact At all times material to this proceeding, the Respondent Bruce R. Dowell was licensed as a real estate salesman in the State of Florida and presently holds license number 0022658. The Respondent is employed as a real estate salesman by Allen Pacetti, a licensed real estate broker doing business as Pacetti Realty Company, 49 Cordova Street, St. Augustine, Florida 32084. Mr. Pacetti has a policy within his office of permitting his real estate salespersons to assist members of their immediate families with real estate transactions without involving the office or notifying the broker. Accordingly, the Respondent did not inform Mr. Pacetti of his efforts to rent his daughter's home. The Respondent's daughter and son-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. William Kasperski, owned a residence next door to the Respondent at 202 Coquina Avenue, St. Augustine, Florida, which they rented while they were out of the state for extended periods of time. The home would be shown to prospective tenants by either Mr. Dowell, his wife or other family members depending upon who was home when prospective tenants arrived. The rental property had been leased to at least two other tenants prior to the incident which prompted the instant complaint. In March, 1980, the Respondent placed an ad in the general classified section of the St. Augustine Record advertising the Kasperski home for rent. The advertisement was seen by a co-worker of Mr. and Mrs. G. David Petty who inspected the home and recommended it to them. Mr. Petty and his wife Frances Petty subsequently examined the home and orally agreed to a monthly rental of $265. Neither the Petty nor the Respondent requested or offered to sign a written lease. The Respondent informed the Petty that the owner was not expected to return to Florida for at least a year. The Pettys made an initial payment to the Respondent of $85 which represented a pro-rata share of the March rent. The Respondent would collect the checks from the Pettys and forward them to the Kasperskies who at the time were residing in Pennsylvania. The Respondent did not receive a fee, commission or any other renumeration in return for renting his daughter's home. During the course of the Petty three-month occupancy, the Respondent became concerned over the condition of the home and alterations which were made by the Pettys without prior authorization from the owners. The Respondent conveyed his concerns over the condition of the property to his son-in-law who in turn contacted an attorney in Pennsylvania, Louis D. Poulette. Mr. Poulette informed the Pettys by letter that the lease was terminated by the owners effective July 31, 1980. The Pettys vacated on July 15, 1980, and were refunded the balance of their rent payment for July, 1980. On August 1, 1980, the Respondent readvertised the property and it was rented in September, 1980 for $265 per month.
Recommendation Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Real Estate, enter a final order dismissing the Administrative Complaint filed against the Respondent, Bruce R. Dowell. DONE and ORDERED this day 3 of February, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. SHARYN L.SMITH Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 3rd day of February, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Barry Sinoff, Esquire 2400 Independent Square One Independent Drive Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Robert F. Spohrer, Esquire ZISSER ROBISON SPOHRER WILNER & HARRIS, P.A. 303 Liberty Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 C. B. Stafford, Executive Director Florida Real Estate Commission 400 West Robinson Avenue Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the charges against Respondent, Linda N. Phillips, be DISMISSED. DONE and ENTERED this 16th day of October, 1981, 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 16th day of October, 1981.
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.
