Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs LESLIE BUTLER, 98-004649 (1998)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:West Palm Beach, Florida Oct. 20, 1998 Number: 98-004649 Latest Update: Nov. 08, 1999

The Issue Whether Petitioner has cause to terminate the Respondent's employment as alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated October 20, 1998.

Findings Of Fact On August 14, 1998, Respondent, a teacher employed by Petitioner, entered a plea of guilty to the charge of exploitation of an elderly person, which is a first degree felony pursuant to Section 825.103, Florida Statutes. At the same time, Respondent also entered a plea of guilty to the charge of petit theft over $100.00, which is a first degree misdemeanor. In entering these pleas, Respondent advised the court, pursuant to Rule 3.172(d), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, that she believed the pleas were in her best interest and that she was maintaining her innocence to the charges. The court withheld adjudication of guilt as to the charge of exploitation of an elderly person, adjudicated her guilty of petit theft, sentenced her to one day of time served, placed her on probation for 20 years, and required that she pay restitution to the Estate of Lillie Keller in the amount of $52,000.00. 1/ By letter dated October 21, 1997, Petitioner reassigned Respondent to a position with no direct contact with children pending the outcome of the criminal charges. Following an investigation, the superintendent of schools recommended to the school board that Respondent's employment be suspended without pay and terminated. On October 7, 1998, the school board voted to adopt that recommendation. The recommendation and the subsequent vote to adopt the recommendation were based on Respondent's plea of guilty to the charge of exploitation of an elderly person. Petitioner followed its procedural rules in investigating this matter and in voting to terminate Respondent's employment. As of October 7, 1998, Respondent held a professional services contract and had been employed by Petitioner for approximately 13 years as a teacher. Section 231.02(1), Florida Statutes, requires school board employees to be of good moral character. Respondent, as a teacher, is required by Section 231.02(2), Florida Statutes, to be fingerprinted and screened by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Section 435.03(2), Florida Statutes, provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (2) Any person for whom employment screening is required by statute must not have been found guilty of, regardless of adjudication, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, any offense prohibited under any of the following provisions of the Florida Statutes or under any similar statute of another jurisdiction: * * * (v) Section 825.103, relating to exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult, if the offense was a felony. Petitioner's Rule 3.12, pertaining to criminal background checks of current and prospective employees, has been duly enacted and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: Definitions: For the purposes of this policy: * * * b. "Conviction" means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or a trial regardless of whether adjudication is withheld. * * * 3. A prospective or current employee may be disqualified or may be terminated from continued employment if the prospective or current employee has been convicted of a crime classified as a felony or first degree misdemeanor directly related to the position of employment sought or convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude or any of the offenses enumerated in Chapter 435, Florida Statutes. Section M of the collective bargaining agreement between the Petitioner and the Palm Beach County Classroom Teachers' Association provides for progressive discipline of covered employees such as Respondent. Section M provides, in pertinent part, as follows: Without the consent of the employee and the Association, disciplinary action may not be taken against an employee except for just cause, and this must be substantiated by clear and convincing evidence which supports the recommended disciplinary action. * * * 7. Except in cases which clearly constitute a real and immediate danger to the District or the actions/inactions of the employee constitute such clearly flagrant and purposeful violations of reasonable school rules and regulations, progressive discipline shall be administered as follows: Verbal Reprimand With a Written Notation. . . . Written Reprimand. . . . Suspension Without Pay. A suspension without pay may be issued to an employee when appropriate, in keeping with the provisions of this Section, including just cause and applicable law. ... Dismissal. An employee may be dismissed (employment contract terminated or non-renewed) when appropriate in keeping with provisions of this Section, including just cause and applicable law. Section 435.06(2), Florida Statutes, requires an employing agency, such as the Petitioner, to take the following action when an employee has failed to meet the requirements of Section 435.03(2), Florida Statutes: The employer must either terminate the employment of any of its personnel found to be in noncompliance with the minimum standards for good moral character contained in this section or place the employee in a position for which background screening is not required unless the employee is granted an exemption from disqualification pursuant to s. 435.07. 2/

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner enter a final order that terminates Respondent's employment based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained herein. DONE AND ENTERED this 20th day of August, 1999, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON 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 20th day of August, 1999.

Florida Laws (6) 120.57435.03435.06435.07825.103942.04 Florida Administrative Code (2) 6B-1.0016b-4.009
# 1
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF STATE FIRE MARSHAL vs EDWARD G. WHITAKER, JR., 18-005338PL (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Sarasota, Florida Oct. 05, 2018 Number: 18-005338PL Latest Update: Jul. 11, 2019

The Issue The issue is whether Respondent's certification as a Firefighter II Compliance should be permanently revoked for the reasons stated in the Administrative Complaint (Complaint), dated June 6, 2018.

Findings Of Fact The Department is the state agency responsible for licensing and regulating firefighters in the State. Respondent is certified in Florida as a Firefighter II Compliance. He holds Certificate No. 139586. Until the incident underlying this controversy arose, Respondent was employed by the Sarasota County Fire Department as a firefighter/paramedic. He now is working in the emergency room of a local hospital. The parties have stipulated that on March 21, 2018, Respondent entered a plea of nolo contendere to aggravated assault with a weapon, a third-degree felony punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under Florida law. Adjudication was withheld, Respondent was placed on probation for a period of two years, and he was ordered to pay court costs, fines, and fees in the amount of $1,525.00. See also Dep't Ex. 19. In response to the Complaint, Respondent essentially argues that: (a) he should not have been charged with the underlying criminal offense because he was defending himself against an aggressor in a road rage incident, and (b) he entered a nolo contendere plea based on bad advice from his attorney. At hearing, Respondent gave his version of the events resulting in his arrest. Also, two police officers involved with his arrest testified to what they observed and reported. Their testimony conflicts in many respects with Respondent's testimony. The undersigned will not attempt to reconcile the conflicts, as this proceeding is not the appropriate forum in which to relitigate the criminal charge. During the criminal case, Respondent was represented by a criminal law attorney who presented him with two options: enter into a plea arrangement or go to trial and risk a harsher penalty if he were found guilty. Respondent says he accepted his counsel's recommendation that he enter a plea of nolo contendere on the belief that he would not have a felony arrest on his record. After the plea agreement was accepted by the court, Respondent learned that the plea required revocation of his certification and loss of his job. Respondent also testified that even though he paid counsel a $15,000.00 fee, his counsel did little or no investigation regarding what happened, as he failed to depose a single witness before making a recommendation to take a plea.1/ In hindsight, Respondent says he would have gone to trial since he now believes he had a legitimate claim to the "castle defense," and the so-called victim in the incident (the driver of the other car) has a long criminal history and is now incarcerated. At this point, however, if Respondent believes an error in the legal process occurred, his only remedy, if one exists at all, is through the court system and not in an administrative proceeding. A felony plea constitutes noncompliance with the certification statute and requires permanent revocation of a certification. According to a Department witness, however, five years after all requirements of the court's sentencing have been met, the Department has the authority "in a formal process" to make a "felony conviction review" that may result in the reissuance of a certification. Except for this incident, Respondent has no other blemishes on his record. He served in the United States Marine Corps, with combat tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, he was honorably discharged, and he was honored for saving a life at a Target store while off-duty. He has apologized for his actions, taken an anger management course, and received further treatment for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder at a local Veteran's Administration facility.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services enter a final order permanently revoking Respondent's certification. DONE AND ENTERED this 15th day of February, 2019, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S D. R. ALEXANDER 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 15th day of February, 2019.

Florida Laws (5) 11.2421120.68633.406633.408633.426 Florida Administrative Code (1) 69A-37.055 DOAH Case (1) 18-5338PL
# 2
BOARD OF NURSING vs. DOMINGO FORTUNATO GALVAN, 82-000740 (1982)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-000740 Latest Update: Feb. 28, 1983

Findings Of Fact Respondent Domingo Fortunato Galvan is a registered nurse in the State of Florida having been issued license number 71608-2. On or about February 28, 1981, Respondent was found guilty in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida of conspiracy to distribute and possess a controlled substance and of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. That conviction is still on appeal. No evidence was presented by Petitioner with respect to the Respondent's ability to practice as a nurse. Rather, Respondent's evidence indicates that Respondent is a good nurse.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered finding Respondent Domingo Fortunato Galvan guilty of violating Section 464.018(1),(g), Florida Statutes (1979), as charged in the Administrative Complaint and suspending Respondent's license number 71608-2 until the mandate is issued in the appeal of his criminal conviction. If the Respondent's conviction is reversed, his license should be reinstated automatically. If the Respondent's conviction is sustained, he should remain suspended until he appears before the Board of Nursing and demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that he is then and there capable of practicing nursing in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. If and when the Respondent's license is reinstated, the Board may, at its discretion, place the Respondent on probation with reasonable terms and conditions for a period of up to two years. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 1st day of December, 1982, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT, 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 1st day of December, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Julia Forrester, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 W. Ted Ernst, Jr., Esquire 509 Whitehead Street Key West, Florida 33040 Samuel R. Shorstein, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Helen P. Keefe, Executive Director Board of Nursing 111 Coastline Drive, East Suite 504 Jacksonville, Florida 32202

Florida Laws (2) 120.57464.018
# 3
JEFFREY E. DONALDSON vs FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 92-007082 (1992)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Nov. 30, 1992 Number: 92-007082 Latest Update: Oct. 04, 1993

The Issue The central issue in this case is whether Petitioner is entitled to licensure as a real estate salesperson.

Findings Of Fact The Petitioner, Jeffrey E. Donaldson, is an applicant for licensure as a real estate salesperson with the FREC having filed an application for licensure on or about February 4, 1992. As part of the application, Petitioner was directed to answer questions regarding his past criminal record. In answering question 7, Petitioner provided the following response: Arrested for attempted grand theft which I was put on probation for from 2/27/89 to 2/1/92 and paid a fine for. Never convicted of any crime and adjudication was withheld. Other than the answer described above, Petitioner provided no information regarding past criminal charges or other criminal involvements. In 1987, Petitioner was charged with grand theft and was placed on probation. In 1989, Petitioner was charged, in addition to the grand theft charge noted above, with a violation of the terms of his probation from the 1987 grand theft charge. In 1973, Petitioner was charged with forging a prescription and was placed on probation. Petitioner explained that he had omitted the other criminal charges from the application form as it did not provide enough space for the listing of all offenses, and because the FREC did not ask about the offenses when it sought additional information about the one charge disclosed. Petitioner did not deny the criminal charges nor that the incidents occurred. Petitioner maintained that his criminal activities resulted from his alcohol and drug addiction; that he sought help for same and attends meetings of Narcotics Anonymous; and that because his father had been an alcoholic, Petitioner was exposed to the behaviors from a young age. At the time of hearing, Petitioner did not have a real estate broker who would be willing to sponsor him. Petitioner has worked for Ryder Trucks for almost eighteen years.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is, hereby, RECOMMENDED: That the Florida Real Estate Commission enter a final order denying Petitioner's application for licensure as a real estate salesperson. DONE AND RECOMMENDED this 28th day of July, 1993, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Joyous D. 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 28th day of July, 1993. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 92-7082 Rulings on the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner: None submitted. Rulings on the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Respondent: Paragraphs 1-3 and 5-14 are admitted. Paragraph 4 is rejected as argument. COPIES FURNISHED: Darlene F. Keller Division Director Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802-1900 Jack McRay General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe, Suite 60 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792 Manuel E. Oliver Assistant Attorney General Suite 107 South 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Jeffrey E. Donaldson 1475 S.E. 15th Street, #304 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316

Florida Laws (1) 475.17
# 5
EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION vs. KENNETH R. WILLIAMS, 82-000236 (1982)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-000236 Latest Update: Aug. 06, 1982

Findings Of Fact On March 28, 1978, Kenneth Williams submitted application for employment to Duval County School Board (Exhibit 24) in which he acknowledged prior arrest for auto theft in 1968 and indicated he was placed on parole. This application was never signed by Williams but was treated for all purposes, including his employment, as a complete application. Due to administrative error, the normal police name check was not accomplished on this application and Respondent was hired as a science teacher by Duval County school system. On 24 March 1978 Respondent applied to the Florida Department of Education for a teacher's certificate (Exhibit 12). On this application in Item V which inquired if applicant had been arrested, Respondent checked the "Yes" block and on the two lines below he showed the place, date, nature of charge and disposition of the two most serious charges for which Respondent had been arrested and convicted. He there showed a 1968 auto theft and a 1969 robbery. Disposition of both was that he is on parole. At the time this application was approved and issued on 23 May 1978, Petitioner was certainly aware that Respondent had been convicted of at least two felonies. Had inquiry been made to determine Respondent's full criminal record, it would have been disclosed that in 1965 Respondent was found guilty of petty larceny (Exhibit 13) and sentenced to six months; in 1967 he was convicted of two counts of larceny of a motor vehicle (Exhibit 14) and sentenced to seven years imprisonment; in 1969 he was convicted of robbery and sentenced to 25 years confinement to start after the seven-year sentence was terminated (Exhibit 15); that a probation of October 7, 1966, was set aside and Respondent was sentenced to serve six months for resisting an officer (Exhibit 16); that in 1974 Respondent was found to be in violation of Florida's Financial Responsibility Law and fined $25 (Exhibit 17); that in 1975 he was found guilty of attempted petty larceny and sentenced to 60 days, of which 45 were suspended (Exhibit 18); that in 1976 he was charged with battery and the charge was nol- prossed (Exhibit 19); and that in 1976 and 1977 he had three convictions for driving with a suspended license (Exhibits 20, 21 and 22). The three offenses for which Respondent had been sentenced to prison for 25 and seven years, i.e., robbery and two larcenies of vehicles, had been reported. Those not reported carried a total sentence of less than six months in jail. Following Respondent's arrest in 1979 on a charge of battery (Exhibit 19), this was reported to the Duval County school system, security division, with the information that Respondent had a lengthy arrest record. The information was then passed by the security division to the Personnel Department with the recommendation that Respondent not be employed in a position requiring contact with children (Exhibit 26). The information on the arrest record was also passed to the Florida Department of Education for appropriate action. At the time of this arrest, the Respondent was assigned as science teacher at Forrest High School. The battery charge was nol-prossed in 1980. Upon receipt of Respondent's arrest record at the Department of Education, the case was assigned to a staff member for investigation and recommendation. His report (Exhibit 31) states that Respondent does not deny the arrest record and "indeed recorded same in his application for certification." As noted above, Respondent reported the three most serious offenses of which he had been convicted in the space provided on the application form. The fact that arrests for the less serious offenses of petty larceny were not included by Respondent on his application was evidently known and considered by this investigator in reaching his conclusion that the issue of fraudulent application for certification does not arise in this application. At the time Exhibit 31 was prepared, the procedure for processing complaints against teachers was being revised and neither the old system nor the new system was followed to its proper conclusion. As a result no final action was taken by Petitioner on the recommendation of the investigator that no probable cause for disciplinary action existed on the allegation that Williams was unfit to retain his certification. At the time this recommendation was made (and without the prescribed follow-up to a final agency action), Respondent's record, as known by Petitioner, showed Respondent had been paroled in 1973, to remain on probation until 1986; that he enrolled at the University of North Florida and graduated with a BA degree in 1978 with a major in natural science; that he had been teaching with satisfactory evaluations in the Duval County school system for over a year; and that the battery charge stemmed from a domestic dispute. On 31 October 1980 Respondent proceeded to the apartment of his former girlfriend, Shirley Hall, and the mother of his eight-year-old son to take the boy a Halloween costume. When Ms. Hall would not allow the Respondent to see the boy, angry words were exchanged and Respondent departed. He was later seen shortly after midnight, November 1, 1980, in the vicinity of Ms. Hall's car which was parked in a lot near her apartment by both Ms. Hall's mother, who was visiting, and by a neighbor. By mid-morning on November 1, 1980, Ms. Hall became aware that the interior of her car had been burned during the night and she called the police. When she parked the car on the evening of October 31, 1980, Ms. Hall locked the car as she did every time she left the car unattended. Williams, two or three years ago when on friendly relations with Ms. Hall, had been given a key to Ms. Hall's car. No evidence was presented that he had returned the key or that he still had the key. Upon arrival, the police found the car unlocked and two plastic milk cartons of one-gallon capacity inside the car. Both of these cartons contained gasoline and one was melted about one-third away from the top. The physical evidence indicates that one carton with gasoline and rolled paper wick had been placed under the steering wheel and one placed on the back seat of the car. The wicks had been lighted, the door closed and the ensuing flames and smoke had blackened the windows and cause serious damage to the upholstery and overhead of the car. Lack of oxygen in the car caused both fires to become extinguished before enough heat was generated to cause the gas to explode or to blow out the windows. Approximately two days later Respondent was arrested and charged with arson (Exhibit 23). Following a mistrial the case was nol-prossed. This charge against Respondent received publicity in the Jacksonville papers and at least once was reported on TV news. While these charges were pending, Respondent was removed from his position at Forrest High School and assigned to the media center for the duration of that school year. In September 1981 Respondent was assigned to Ribault Junior High School as a science teacher. In March 1982 he received an overall evaluation of satisfactory from his principal at Ribault.

# 6
ROBERT KENT SAUNDERS vs DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, 96-004311 (1996)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Panama City, Florida Sep. 12, 1996 Number: 96-004311 Latest Update: Jun. 11, 1997

The Issue Whether the Petitioner’s request for an exemption pursuant to Chapter 435, Florida Statutes, should be granted.

Findings Of Fact Mr. Saunders seeks an exemption for employment in a position for which a security background check is required pursuant to Sections 397.451 and 435.04, Florida Statutes. Presently, Mr. Saunders is employed as an intern human service worker at Reliance House, an adult residential facility located in Panama City, Bay County, Florida. In addition to working at Reliance House, Mr. Saunders is enrolled at Gulf Coast Community College working toward a degree as a Certified Addition Associate Professional. Mr. Saunders sought this exemption so that he could work with children receiving substance abuse services. In 1990, Mr. Saunders was charged with and plead nolo contendere to the charges of burglary, possession of burglary tools, and carrying a concealed weapon. Mr. Saunders was placed on two years' probation. In 1991, Mr. Saunders pled guilty to the charges of burglary of a structure, attempted burglary of a structure, grand theft, criminal mischief, and burglary of a business. In 1992, Mr. Saunders was charged with burglary of a liquor store. Mr. Saunders testified that the burglary charge was reduced to a charge of criminal trespass and that he remained under court supervised probation until October, 1996. Mr. Saunders expressed remorse for his criminal behavior and accepted complete responsibility. He also believes that he shares some of the same problems that are exhibited by the residents of Reliance House and that he would be a good role model because he is attempting to correct his life. Christiane LeClair is a background screening coordinator employed by the Department of Children and Families. As part of her duties, Ms. LeClair reviews employment applications to determine if an applicant is worthy of a position of special trust. Ms. LeClair determined that Mr. Saunders was not qualified because of his conviction of grand theft. She also noted that Mr. Saunders has been released from supervision of the courts for only three months and that it is too early to determine if he has been rehabilitated.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department enter a Final Order and therein DENY Mr. Saunders’ request for an exemption.DONE and ENTERED this 12th day of March, 1997, at Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM A. BUZZETT Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (904) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (904) 921-6847 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 12th day of March, 1997.

Florida Laws (4) 120.57397.451435.04435.07
# 7
BERNARD STEFON GONZALEZ vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 85-001301 (1985)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 85-001301 Latest Update: Nov. 19, 1985

Findings Of Fact Petitioner's application for licensure as a real estate salesman reveals that he was born in Miami, Florida, in 1960. In 1979 Petitioner asked a friend to take him to a department store so he could do some shopping. While Petitioner was inside the store shopping, his friend was stealing hub caps in the parking lot until he was caught by the police who arrested both Petitioner and his friend. Petitioner was charged with grand larceny from a building and possession of a barbiturate (methaqualone), but the charges were dropped. In 1981 Petitioner borrowed a car from an acquaintance in order to go out on a date. While Petitioner was driving the car, he was stopped for a traffic violation at which time it was discovered that the borrowed car was a rental car which had been stolen. Although Petitioner was arrested for vehicular theft of an automobile, that charge was dismissed. In 1984 while Petitioner was attempting to locate the home of a friend, he stopped at a house which turned out to. be on the wrong street. As he was returning from the front door of the house to his car, he was stopped by the police. Since the home was located in a neighborhood subject to burglaries and Petitioner did not live in that neighborhood, he was arrested and charged with trespassing and with loitering and prowling. Pursuant to the advice of his public defender, Petitioner plead to one of those charges adjudication was withheld on that charge and the other charge was dropped. Petitioner was not placed on probation and no fine was imposed on him although he believes that he paid court costs. Petitioner disclosed all of the above-described arrests to Respondent in his application for licensure although the application seeks information regarding convictions and not arrests where no conviction or adjudication ever occurs. For the past five years Petitioner has been employed by United Cerebral Palsy. His duties include vehicle maintenance, building maintenance, and lawn maintenance for two group homes. He receives weekly advances from his employer for purchasing supplies. Petitioner has been married for approximately one year.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore, RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered approving Petitioner's application for licensure as a real estate salesman, subject to the successful completion of any required examination. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 19th day of November, 1985, at Tallahassee, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT, 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 19th day of November, 1985. COPIES FURNISHED: Bernard Stefon Gonzalez Post Office Box 610104 North Miami, FL 33261 Ralph Armstead, Esquire Department of Legal Affairs 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, FL 32801 Harold Huff, Executive Director Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, FL 32801| Fred Roche, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32301 Salvatore A. Carpino, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32301

Florida Laws (2) 120.57475.17
# 8
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES vs BRADFORD SCOTT BATEMAN, 06-000051PL (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Jan. 05, 2006 Number: 06-000051PL Latest Update: Sep. 25, 2006

The Issue The issue is whether Respondent’s license as a public adjuster, all lines, should be revoked.

Findings Of Fact Respondent is licensed by the Department as a public adjuster, all lines. His license number is A015739. On September 1, 2004, Respondent pled nolo contendere to three counts of “lewd or lascivious molestation” in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. Each count was a second degree felony pursuant to Section 800.04(5)(c)2., Florida Statutes (2004).2 On that same date, Respondent was adjudicated guilty of all three counts and was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be “mitigated” to 364 days in jail upon his timely surrender into custody on November 1, 2004. The transcript of the court hearing at which Respondent’s plea was accepted, Exhibit R14, includes an extensive colloquy between Respondent and the judge, the prosecutor, and his defense attorney. The colloquy reflects that Respondent was fully apprised of the plea negotiations between his attorney and the prosecutor; that he was advised of the consequences of the court's accepting his plea and adjudicating him guilty, including the likelihood that he would lose his professional license as a result of his convictions; and that he was advised of his right to reject the plea offered by the prosecutor and go to trial. The circumstances underlying Respondent’s criminal offenses are described in an Affidavit for Criminal Offense dated December 19, 2003, and in a Prosecution Report prepared sometime thereafter. Those documents, which were offered into evidence by Respondent at the final hearing in this case, reflect that Respondent admitted to going into his then 14-year- old step-daughter’s bedroom a number of times over a period of two years to view her genitalia by lifting her pajamas and moving aside her panties while she slept. In August 2005, the Department commenced an investigation of Respondent after it learned of his criminal convictions. The investigation was conducted by Nelson Herold. Mr. Herold compiled records related to Respondent’s public adjuster business as well as documents from the Collier County Clerk’s office related to Respondent’s criminal convictions. Mr. Herold met with Respondent while he was in jail and advised him of the Department’s investigation and its intent to revoke his public adjuster’s license based upon his felony convictions. Respondent was given an opportunity to provide a response as part of Mr. Herold’s investigation, but there is no evidence that he did so. On October 10, 2005, the Department issued a Notice of Revocation, which informed Respondent that his public adjuster’s license was revoked based upon his felony convictions. The Notice advised Respondent of his right to request an administrative hearing, and Respondent timely did so. Respondent was not present at the final hearing. Respondent's counsel waived Respondent's presence at the final hearing and elected to proceed without him.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services issue a final order affirming the Notice of Revocation and revoking Respondent’s license as a public adjuster, all lines. DONE AND ENTERED this 10th day of May, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S T. KENT WETHERELL, II 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 10th day of May, 2006.

Florida Laws (14) 120.569120.57120.60120.69626.207626.611626.621626.631626.8437626.854626.869626.8698775.08775.082
# 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