The Issue Whether the Respondent was validly disciplined by a local government, which causes the Respondent to be in violation of Section 489.129(1)(i), Florida Statutes. Whether the Respondent is guilty of fraud, or deceit or of gross negligence, incompetence, or misconduct in the practice of contracting, in violation of Section 489.129(1)(m), Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact At all times material to these proceedings, the Respondent, Tillack Ram Netram, was licensed as a certified residential contractor and held license number CR C035238. On or about November 16, 1988, a duly noticed hearing was held before the Contractors Regulatory Board of the City of Cape Coral to determine whether Respondent Netram had violated local ordinances by falsifying three certificates of occupancy in order to close real estate transactions and receive money before the residences were actually approved for occupancy by the City of Cape Coral. The incomplete permits were removed from the property prior to actual completion, and copies of falsified permits were given to the closing agent. The falsified permits showed that certificates of occupancy had been issued by the local building department when in fact, this had not occurred. All of the witnesses at the hearing were placed under oath and were subject to cross-examination by Respondent Netram's attorney, Terry Signorella. The Respondent was present at the proceeding and was allowed to present evidence and to testify in his own behalf. At the close of the evidentiary portion of the proceeding on November 16, 1988, Respondent Netram was found guilty by the local board of making misleading, deceptive, untrue or fraudulent representations in the practice of his contracting business. He committed these violations by delivering three building permits with forged signatures under the Certificate of Occupancy approval portion of the permits to Miss Peggy Burt of Stewart Title Company in Fort Myers. This conduct constitutes three violations of Section 6.10(1) of the Municipal Code. As a result of the alleged violations, Respondent's permit pulling privileges were suspended for a period of six months. An appeal was not taken of the disciplinary action. On November 15, 1988, an Information was filed against the Respondent which charged the Respondent with five counts of grand theft and scheme to defraud in connection with five separate real estate sales. At the time of hearing, these charges were still pending. The investigator for the State Attorney's offices attended the formal administrative hearing and presented a copy of his investigatory file. All of the testimony and documents presented were uncorroborated hearsay. None of the documents, including official records, were properly verified. There was no evidence submitted in mitigation or in aggravation of the penalties provided for the alleged violations.
Recommendation Because the Respondent committed the misconduct in regards to three different building permits, he should be penalized for his action as to each permit. Accordingly, it is Recommended: That the Respondent be found not guilty of having violated Section 489.129(1)(m), Florida Statutes, as set forth in paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Administrative Complaint. That the Respondent be found not guilty of having violated Section 489.129(1)(i), Florida Statutes, for the misconduct alleged in paragraph 4 of the complaint. That the Respondent be found guilty of having violated Section 489.129(1)(i), Florida Statutes, as set forth in paragraph 6 of the complaint. That the Respondent pay a fine of $1 500.00, as set forth in Rule 21E- 17.001(8), Florida Administrative Code, for his willful violation, on three occasions, of the municipal building code. DONE and ENTERED this 23rd day of February, 1990, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. VERONICA E. DONNELLY Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of February, 1990. APPENDIX TO THE RECOMMENDED ORDER IN CASE NO. 89-0819 Petitioner's proposed findings of fact are addressed as follows: Accepted. Accepted. See HO #1. Rejected. Irrelevant. Not charged in the Amended Administrative Complaint. Rejected. Insufficient competent evidence provided at hearing. Accepted. Accepted except for the allegation that Respondent forged the inspector's signature. Insufficient proof. See HO #4 and #5. Rejected. Insufficient competent evidence provided at hearing. Rejected. Insufficient competent evidence provided at hearing. Accepted. See preliminary matters. COPIES FURNISHED: David M. Gaspari, Esquire Post Office Box 2069 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 Tillack Ram Netram 532 Southeast 18th Place Cape Coral, FL 33904 Fred Seely Executive Director Construction Industry Licensing Post Office Box 2 Jacksonville, FL 32202 Kenneth D. Easley General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Suite 60 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0792
Findings Of Fact Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found: In April of 1986, the petitioner, Donny Lynn Hair, filed an application for licensure as a real estate salesman. In answering Question Number 6 of the application, which requests information concerning an applicant's criminal record, petitioner answered in the affirmative, explaining "1975 Lewisburg, Ohio - for fighting. 2 years probation. 1983 Santa Monica, Cal. - for child molesting. 4 years probation." At the final hearing, petitioner testified in his own behalf. He explained the "fighting" incident as one occurring during his school years when a "bully" had broken his nose and he became upset with him. For that offense, he was placed on probation for a period of two years. In 1983, petitioner was charged with two counts of child molesting. At the time, petitioner was 25 or 26 years old, and the charges involved two young girls, ages six and seven. For these offenses, petitioner was placed on probation for a period of four years, with a condition that he not associate with children under the age of 18. The probationary period ended in September of this year. Petitioner testified that he has learned from his past mistakes, and that he has not violated the terms of his four-year probation. Petitioner presented no other witnesses to testify in his behalf, nor was any documentary evidence offered by the petitioner. A composite exhibit was received into evidence as Hearing Officer's Exhibit 1. This exhibit is comprised of petitioner's application for licensure and various other documents related thereto, including two forms purportedly completed by persons listed on petitioner's application as references. While each of the two references indicated on the form provided that petitioner was of good character, neither was aware of petitioner's criminal convictions for child molesting.
Recommendation Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law recited herein, it is RECOMMENDED that petitioner's application for licensure as a real estate salesman be DENIED, without prejudice to petitioner to reapply for such licensure after a period of two years. Respectfully submitted and entered this 27th day of October, 1987, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE D. TREMOR 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 27th day of October, 1987. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 86-3599 The parties were informed of the opportunity to submit proposed findings of fact and proposed conclusions of law subsequent to the final hearing. Counsel for the respondent availed himself of the opportunity, and his proposed findings of fact have been accepted and included herein. The petitioner did not submit any post-hearing proposals. COPIES FURNISHED: Donny L. Hair 2606 Hollyridge Drive New Port Richey, FL 33552 Manuel E Oliver, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Suite 212, 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, FL 32801 Darlene F. Keller Acting Executive Director Department of Professional Regulation Florida Real Estate Commission Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801
Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence presented at hearing, the Hearing Officer makes the following findings of fact: Phillip S. Wong is a convicted felon. On December 6, 1982, after entering a plea of guilty, he was adjudicated guilty of one count of each of the following crimes: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill, in violation of Section 784.021(1)(a), Florida Statutes; false imprisonment, in violation of Section 787.02, Florida Statutes; burglary of a dwelling during which an assault was made, in violation of Section 810.02, Florida Statutes; conspiracy to commit a felony, to wit: trafficking in cocaine, in violation of Sections 777.04 and 893.135, Florida Statutes; trafficking in cocaine, in violation of Section 893.135, Florida Statutes; and possession of cocaine with the intent to sell, in violation of Section 893.13, Florida Statues. For these offenses, all of which were committed in August of 1982, Wong received five 1/ separate three-year sentences of imprisonment that ran concurrently with one another. As a prisoner, Wong's conduct was exemplary. Accordingly, in May, 1984, he was placed in a work release program. He completed serving his sentence in September, 1985. Since his return to the community, Wong has married and become a father. To help support his family, he works as a chef in a French restaurant, a position he has held for the past four and a half years. Wong is now a dedicated family man concerned about the welfare of his wife and their two and a half year old child. This concern has prompted him to seek a career in real estate so that he will be better able to provide for his family.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent enter a Final Order denying Petitioner's application for licensure to practice as a real estate salesman, without prejudice to Petitioner filing a subsequent application when he is able to show that his rehabilitation is sufficiently complete to entitle him to such licensure. See Karl v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 229 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)(Commission may not preclude an applicant whose application has been denied because of a prior felony conviction from reapplying for licensure and showing subsequent rehabilitation). DONE and ENTERED this 10th day of April 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STUART M. LERNER 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 10th day of April, 1989.
Findings Of Fact Beginning on July 9, 1973, up to and including the date of the hearing, the Respondent, Hal K. Johnson, was a registered real estate salesman under certificate no. 54569, held with the Florida Real Estate Commission. In the January 22, 1973 application which the Respondent, Hal K. Johnson, filed for registration as a real estate salesman, he answered the question no. 9 found therein. Question no. 9 says: "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, without regard to whether sentence has been passed or served, or whether the verdict or judgement has been reversed or set aside or not, or pardon or parole granted. if yes, state details in full. The answer which was given by Hal K. Johnson was, "DWI, December, 1972 & June, 1976, Failure to yield, Dec. 1972". In addition to the offenses indicated in his answer to question no. 9, the Respondent, Hal K. Johnson, had been arrested for a number of other offenses. On September 20, 1955, the Respondent had been arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On August 20, 1957, the Respondent had been arrested for driving while intoxicated. On January 28, 1959, the Respondent had been arrested for driving while intoxicated. On February 27, 1959, the Respondent had been arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On March 6, 1959, the Respondent had been arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On July 1, 1959, the Respondent had been arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On August 12, 1961, the Respondent was arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On January 17, 1962, the Respondent was arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On November 10, 1962, the Respondent was arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On September 18, 1963, the Respondent was arrested for having no drivers license. On December 13, 1963, the Respondent was arrested for disorderly conduct/drunk. On March 23, 1967, the Respondent was charged with disorderly conduct/drunk and profane language. On July 30, 1967, the Respondent was charged with disorderly conduct/drunk. On September 4, 1967, the Respondent was charged with reckless operation of motor vehicle, driving while under the influence of intoxicating beverages. On June 5, 1968, the Respondent was charged with disorderly conduct/drunk. On July 19, 1968, the Respondent was charged with disorderly conduct/drunk. On April 18, 1972, the Respondent was charged with disorderly conduct/drunk.
Recommendation At the hearing, the Respondent, Hal K. Johnson, did not challenge the facts as presented in the administrative complaint. His intention in appearing at the hearing was to offer mitigation. In the way of mitigation, Mr. Johnson said that he was only given one line to answer the question no. 9, which did not provide him enough room, notwithstanding the fact that he had read the instructions which said that additional information should be provided on a separate sheet. Moreover, Mr. Johnson said that the language of question no. 9, which says "commission of an offense . . .", only calls for just one offense to be listed and he in fact listed three. He also said that he did not put some of the drunk arrests down because now they don't even require you to be arrested, they just take you someplace." In addition, he indicated that he did not know where to get the records of these arrests that had been placed against him. He said he thought that the records of these matters were found in Tallahassee, Florida. The three indications of arrests were also felt, in the mind of the Respondent, to be a sufficient indication of the 20 arrests that had been made. Finally, the Respondent said that he wants to make it clear that he didn't intend to try to make misstatements, although he agrees that he failed to elaborate, which to him was an error of omission not intent. Having considered the explanation offered by Mr. Hal K. Johnson, the Respondent, in view of the facts, it is recommended that his certificate no. 54569, as a registered real estate salesman be revoked. DONE and ENTERED this 14th day of February, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Bruce Kamelhair, Esquire Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road Winter Park, Florida 32789 Mr. Hal K. Johnson c/o Fowler Realty 8917 Atlantic Boulevard Jacksonville, Florida 32211
Findings Of Fact The parties stipulated that except for the reasons set forth in the Department's letter of March 17, 1983, the Petitioner, Suzanne McDermott, is otherwise qualified for licensure. On May 14, 1977, in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, the Petitioner pled guilty to the offense of unlawfully and feloniously delivering a certain controlled substance, to wit: cocaine. Said court withheld adjudication and imposition of sentence and placed the Petitioner on probation for seven years. After she was placed on probation, Petitioner ceased using controlled substances. By order of the court, she was evaluated by a drug treatment program, found to be not addicted to controlled substances, and has not since used controlled substances. Petitioner's probation was terminated after two years by the recommendation of her probation officer, and she has been off probation for approximately three years. The Petitioner completed an application for licensure as a general lines agent and submitted it to the Department of Insurance and Treasurer. She answered in the negative Question 13 of said application, which reads as follows: Have you ever been charged with or convicted of a felony? The Petitioner stated that she interpreted this question to ask whether she had been convicted of a felony (TR-11.) The Petitioner has not been convicted of a felony. Petitioner's testimony was credible. When asked to clarify or amplify her status, the Petitioner employed an attorney to obtain her court records and provided them to the Department. These records were the ones introduced by the Department at the hearing. The Petitioner has been employed for five and a half years with Poe and Associates, Inc. Tom McMullen, a vice president with Poe and Associates and the Petitioner's immediate supervisor, testified that she is a highly competent and knowledgeable employee. She has completed the educational requirements to be an underwriter. McMullen observes Petitioner's work every business day, and she is responsible for handling money on a routine basis. Her accounts are always in order, and she has never had any problem with her accounts. At the time the Petitioner engaged in the activities for which she was placed on probation, she was head teller at Southeast Bank of Tampa. These activities did not in any way involve her position with the bank.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that the application of the Petitioner, Suzanne McDermott, for licensure as a general lines agent be approved. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 8th day of September, 1983, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN, 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 8th day of September, 1983. COPIES FURNISHED: Ms. Suzanne McDermott 4208 Watrous Avenue Tampa, Florida 33609 Clark R. Jennings, Esquire Department of Insurance 413-B Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 The Honorable Bill Gunter State Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Findings Of Fact Joseph Pine is a registered real estate salesman holding license certificate number 0131432 and was so registered on December 6, 1976. Joseph Pine entered a plea of guilty to the possession of a controlled substance, cannabis, over five (5) grams. The court withheld adjudication and placed Pine on supervised probation for three (3) years because Pine was living in Quba, Netherlands Antilles. The possession of a controlled substance, cannabis, is a violation of Section 893.13(1)(a)2., Florida Statutes. This is a felony of the third degree.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends the case be dismissed and no action be taken. DONE and ORDERED this 7th day of November, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 7th day of November, 1977. COPIES FURNISHED: Manuel E. Oliver, Esquire Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road Winter Park, Florida 32789 Harry L. Garber, Esquire Garber & Buoniconti, P.A. 1040 City National Bank Building 25 West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33130
The Issue The issues to be resolved are whether or not the Respondent obtained his license by fraud, misrepresentation or concealment in not listing all convictions on his sworn application for registration and if so, what penalty or other disciplinary action he should be subjected to, based on his conduct which will be specifically referred to herein in detail.
Findings Of Fact The Respondent, after having timely filed a request for an Administrative Hearing pursuant to Florida Statutes 120.57(2), filed an answer on or about August 25, 1975, wherein he admitted the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the Commission's Complaint which has been marked for identification as Petitioner's Exhibit 1 and made a part hereof. The referenced answer is marked for identification as Exhibit 2 and is also made a part hereof. The Respondent, in his answer, denied the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Administrative Complaint and alleged specifically that at the time of submitting his application to the Commission, he had no recollection of the events which occurred during the time that he was a juvenile. Further, the Respondent alleges that he did not recall dates, charges or circumstances surrounding the matters which were required to be answered by question no. 9 on his application for Real Estate Salesman and that when he filed his application with the Commission for a real estate license as a salesman, he requested a full report from the Clearwater Police Department and used that report as the basis for completing his application. Additionally, his counsel urged that at the time that he completed his application, he honestly believed that the questions had been answered completely in every detail and that there was no intent on his part to conceal or otherwise mislead the Commission such that it would grant him a license without having all of the pertinent facts available for consideration. Petitioner's Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is an application for registration as a real estate salesman and question no. 9 reads as follows: "9. 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, without regard to whether sentence has been passed or served, or whether the verdict or judgment has been reversed or set aside or not, a pardon or parole granted. If yes, state details in full ." According to the allegations of the Commission's Administrative Complaint (the Respondent admitted the allegations in response to question no. 9) the Respondent related approximately 8 incidences during the period November, 1956 through September, 1962. Six of such incidences related to problems regarding traffic offenses and the remaining two related to assault and battery charges. In explanation to these offenses, the Respondent cited the fact that the arrest took place approximately 11 years ago and they were all virtually tied to alcoholic problems. He testified further that he had no problem since that time and that since he resolved his alcoholic problems, he has held responsible positions and has been successful. During the course of the hearing, the Commission percents counsel introduced documents which revealed that the Respondent was arrested by the Sheriff's Department in San Diego, California and charged with robbery sometime in March, 1952, and the disposition of that arrest was that he was turned over to the California Youth Authority at Lancaster. 1/ Petitioner's Exhibit 4 is a document indicating that the Respondent was arrested by the Ft. Wayne, Indiana Police Department and was charged with leaving the scene of an accident, the disposition of which was payment of a 25.00 fine plus costs. Also contained therein is a statement that the Respondent was arrested by the State Police in Indiana and charged with vehicle theft. The disposition of that offense was that the Respondent served one year in prison and he paid $1.00 plus $6.80 for court costs. Board's Exhibit 5 is a document which reveals that the Respondent was arrested by the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office in Largo and charged with driving with his license revoked, for which he served 10 days in the county jail. As stated, the Respondent contends that at the time that he filed his application, he had no intent to mislead the Commission into granting him a license without all of the facts before it and further that he relied on the police reports given him by the Pinellas County Police Department which he requested such that he could intelligently fill out his application. He testified that the incidences which were omitted occurred approximately 20 some odds years ago and that during that period of time he suffered frog acute alcoholism and that he remembered little, if anything, about the numerous incidences in which he was involved in at that time . He testified further that during that period he had few sober days and that was a period of his life which he would like to forget. He reiterated the fact that he had no intent at all to deceive and/or mislead the Commission but rather that based on his state of mind and the lapse of time, a combination of those factors were the basis for which the further disclosures of his problems came to light and that there were no overt or covert acts on his part to mislead the Commission. Prior to this testimony, the Respondent's counsel moved the undersigned to recommend to the Commission that the allegations contained in its Administrative Complaint had not been substantiated and based thereon, they should be dismissed. The undersigned agreed to and is hereby referring such recommendation from counsel to the Commission. Respondent's counsel urged further that assuming arguendo that the Commission in fact proved the allegations of its Administrative Complaint, that the Respondent's omissions were not purposeful or intentional acts, fraud, concealment or any other scheme or design but rather resulted due to a loss of memory and excusable neglect. The Respondent, when questioned, failed to recall the various arrests which he had allegedly committed and failed to disclose. He testified that based on the lapse of time and the numerous arrests, he sought information from the police report and it was based on that report that he completed his application. He testified that he did not go to the sheriff's department to get a booking A report inasmuch as he felt that the two reports would contain the same information and therefore he relied solely on the booking report that he obtained from the police department. He further stated that since he stopped drinking some 14 years ago, he has had substantial responsibilities including property management of two multi-unit facilities; one unit is in St. Petersburg, which contained approximately 368 units and the other is in Clearwater, which contained approximately 146 units. The witness expressed the feeling that the incidents which occurred some 20 odd years ago should not at this time be used against him. Respondent's counsel cited several cases to substantiate his client's position that the elements of fraud had not been proven and that therefore the allegations contained in the Administrative Complaint should be dismissed. At this juncture, Respondent's counsel renewed his motion to dismiss and objected to the introduction of the documents, Petitioner's Exhibits 3 - 5, which the undersigned admitted.
Findings Of Fact By application filed with respondent, Division of Real Estate (Division), on July 5, 1988, petitioner, Garth Arin Malloy, sought licensure as a real estate salesman. In response to question six an the application, petitioner acknowledged that he had been arrested in August 1984 for possession of marijuana, a felony, and burglary and sexual misconduct, both misdemeanors, and ultimately pled guilty to the felony charge of possession of marijuana and the misdemeanor charge of sexual misconduct. After reviewing the application, and securing petitioner's record of arrests, respondent issued proposed agency action in the form of a letter on October 3, 1988, denying the request on the ground petitioner was not "honest, truthful, trustworthy, and of good character" and did not "have a good reputation for fair dealing." The denial prompted petitioner to request a formal hearing. Malloy, who is twenty-eight years old, graduated from Spring Hill College in Mobile, Alabama in February 1983 with a degree in psychology. After graduation, he worked as a recreation director for a residential care facility for emotionally disturbed children in the Mobile area. In August 1984 he was arrested for possession of marijuana after police found marijuana plants growing in his backyard. The charge was a felony under Alabama law. A short time later, one of Malloy's neighbors lodged charges of sexual abuse against him for allegedly making improper advances on her thirteen year old son. A charge of second degree burglary, a felony, was added for Malloy allegedly unlawfully entering the house where the minor resided Upon advice of his attorney, Malloy accepted a negotiated plea offered by the state and pled guilty to the felony charge of possession of marijuana and to a reduced misdemeanor charge of sexual misconduct, and the state agreed to dismiss the burglary charge. After the plea was accepted, Malloy was placed on probation for five years. Except for these offenses, petitioner has never been charged with or convicted of any other crimes. Malloy accepted the above arrangement since he did not wish to go to trial and risk incarceration. He readily acknowledged the presence of marijuana plants in his back yard which he said were for his own consumption and that of some friends. However, he vigorously denied the sexual misconduct and related burglary charges and blamed them on the neighbor who he contended was mentally unstable and vindictive. Since Malloy's plea, he has been on supervised probation which is scheduled to end on January 1, 1990. Under the terms of his probation, Malloy must check in once a month, report his activities to a supervisor and attend counseling sessions. He is currently in the process of requesting an early termination of probation. Malloy left Alabama in early 1985 and worked briefly at a resort in Key West. In late 1985 he began employment with a satellite communications firm in St. Petersburg and was in charge of sales, credit and installations for three area stores. In that capacity, he handled the firm's money and was required to frequently deal with the public. After a brief stint as an assistant store manager with a Sarasota department store, Malloy worked two years as a teller for a Sarasota savings and loan institution where he handled large amounts of cash on a daily basis. It is noteworthy that the bank hired petitioner with the knowledge of his criminal background. Pending the outcome of this proceeding, Malloy is working as an office manager with a Sarasota air-conditioning firm. Malloy now wishes to enter the real estate profession and eventually specialize in appraising. Malloy's honesty, trustworthiness and good reputation were attested to by the branch manager of the bank where Malloy was employed and the owner of the business where he now works. Malloy was described as being honest, reliable and trustworthy. Both had the utmost confidence in entrusting Malloy with handling moneys. Indeed, all positions held by Malloy since 1985 have involved unsupervised responsibilities, the handling of cash and dealings with the public. As such, he has established rehabilitation. There was no evidence to contradict these findings.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Garth Arin Malloy for licensure as a real estate salesman be GRANTED. DONE and ORDERED this 23rd day of March, 1989, in Tallahassee, Florida. DONALD R. ALEXANDER Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of March, 1989. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 88-5666 Petitioner: 1. Covered in finding of fact 1. 2-3. Covered in finding of fact 4. 4-6. Covered in finding of fact 2. 7. Rejected as unnecessary. 8-9. Covered in finding of fact 4. 10-11. Covered in finding of fact 3 12-13. Covered in finding of fact 4. 14. Covered in finding of fact 3. 15. Covered in finding of fact 6. 16-32. Covered in finding of fact 7. 33. Rejected as unnecessary. 34. Covered in finding of fact 5. 35. Covered in finding of fact 4. 36. Rejected as being a conclusion of law. 37-38. Covered in finding of fact 7. 39. Rejected as unnecessary. COPIES FURNISHED: Edwin M. Boyer, Esquire 2055 Wood Street, Suite 220 Sarasota, Florida 34237 Manuel E. Oliver, Esquire Room 212, 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Darlene F. Keller Director Division of Real Estate Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Kenneth E. Easley, Esquire General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750
