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 The Respondent, at all times material to this matter, has been registered with the Florida Real Estate Commission as a real estate salesman. On or about April 3, 1978, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, entered a judgment and commitment order which adjudicated the Respondent guilty of the offense of shoplifting on a military reservation in violation of Section 812.022, Florida Statutes. The Respondent pled guilty to the offense, and the adjudication was based upon her plea. A short sentence was imposed, the execution of which was suspended; a fine was imposed; and she was placed on supervised probation for a period of two years, with several special conditions of probation. The Respondent was directed to undergo psychiatric or psychological care and counselling. The Respondent is being supervised in her probation by Larry Burris, a Federal Probation Officer. Officer Burris testified on her behalf at the hearing. The Respondent had never been in any serious trouble prior to the incidents giving rise to the shoplifting charges, and she has been cooperative during the period of her probation. The expiration date of her probation is April, 1980, but it is possible that she will be released from probation before that date. The Respondent has undergone psychiatric care and treatment during her probation. Reports from her physician indicate that she has confronted serious emotional difficulties that she had, that her condition has improved, and that she will soon be released from psychiatric care. The Respondent is not presently working as a real estate salesman.
Findings Of Fact Ciccarelli and Moreau are registrants with the Florida Real Estate Commission (Board of Real Estate), both holding registrations as saleswomen. Ciccarelli and Moreau were the real estate salespersons who handled the transaction for the sale of a residence between Dessie Wilson, the seller, and Carl Dudley, the buyer. Darlene Becker, Wilson's daughter, also owned an interest in the property but was not an actual party to the negotiations between Wilson and Dudley as mediated by Ciccarelli and Moreau. Ciccarelli and Moreau presented to Wilson the contract for sale and purchase containing Dudley's initial offer signed July 13, 1978. A copy of this contract was introduced as Exhibit 7. Wilson made a counter offer by interlineating and initialing certain terms in the contract on July 14, 1978, as indicated by her signature and date on Exhibit 2. Dudley had returned to Fort Myers, Florida, where he was living, and Ciccarelli and Moreau communicated Wilson's counter offer to him by telephone July 18, 1978. Dudley made a counter-counter offer in which he accepted the cash terms proposed by Wilson but included the cement table and benches described in Paragraph 1(c) of the contract in the purchase. The table and benches had been stricken and initialed by Wilson in her offer. Ciccarelli and Moreau annotated the contract to reflect the inclusion of these items in the sale by adding "OK for cement table and benches" to Paragraph 1(c). This contract was not initialed by Dudley before presentation to Wilson because Dudley was in Fort Myers. See Exhibit 9. Ciccarelli and Moreau presented the contract, Exhibit 9, to Wilson, who accepted the terms orally. Ciccarelli and Moreau then sent the contract to Dudley by the letter dated July 18, 1978, Exhibit 4. This letter advised Dudley to initial the contract's changes to include the cement table and benches. Dudley did so and returned the contract to Ciccarelli and Moreau, who then presented the contract to Wilson's daughter, Darlene Becker. Becker executed the contract, Exhibit 9, after it was returned. The transaction closed afterward, and a conveyance of the property and payment were exchanged. The closing was attended by Dudley and Wilson, and no objection to the terms of the contract was raised by either party. After closing a controversy arose between Wilson and Dudley concerning the transfer of the cement table and benches. Wilson returned to Dudley the table and benches which she had removed. Paragraph X of the general provisions of the contract provides that the buyer may request personal property be conveyed by absolute bill of sale.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that no action be taken against the licenses of Ciccarelli and Moreau. DONE and ORDERED this 17th day of March, 1980, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 1001, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 17th day of March, 1980. COPIES FURNISHED: John Huskins, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Harvey R. Klein, Esquire 333 North West Third Avenue Ocala, Florida 32670
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner is an agency of the State of Florida responsible for licensing and regulating real estate salesmen in the State of Florida. The Respondent, George Chaconas, at all times pertinent hereto, was, and still is, the holder of a Florida real estate salesman license, number 0402455. The Respondent was convicted on February 2, 1988, of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, a felony. The Respondent was convicted in United States District Court, District of Baltimore. On April 15, 1988, the Respondent was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. The Respondent is presently serving his sentence in the Federal Correctional Institute located in Tallahassee, Florida. By letter dated February 29, 1988, from the Respondent's counsel, the Petitioner was informed of the Respondent's conviction. The Respondent's conviction is currently on appeal. Mitigating circumstances in this case include the following: (1) the evidence failed to prove that the Respondent's violations harmed real estate consumers or the real estate public; (2) there are two counts in the Administrative Complaint; (3) this is the first time the offense has been committed; (4) no disciplinary action has been taken against the Respondent in the past; (5) the Respondent was not on probation or under suspension at the time the violations occurred; (6) the real state business will be the Respondent's only source of income when he is released from incarceration; and (7) the Respondent has not received a letter of guidance.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Respondent's license as a real estate salesman by revoked; provided, that if the Respondent's conviction is reversed on appeal, his license as real estate sales can be reinstated. DONE and ENTERED this 29th day of August, 1989, in Tallahassee, Florida. LARRY J. SARTIN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of August, 1989. COPIES FURNISHED: Arthur R. Shell, Jr. Senior Attorney Department of Professional Regulation Division of Real Estate Legal Section Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 George Chaconas Federal Correctional Institute Capital Circle #07593-018, PMB 1000 Unit B/X Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Kenneth Easley, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Suite 60 Tallahassee, Florida 32390-0729 Darlene F. Keller Division Director Department of Professional Regulation 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando Florida 32802
Findings Of Fact By an application dated February 19, 1979, Petitioner, Barbara Ann Bisque, applied for registration as a real estate salesman with the Florida Board of Real Estate. Question number 6 on the application asked: "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 paroled?" To that question Petitioner answered "Yes." If a "Yes" answer is provided the applicant was asked to state the details including the outcome in full. She wrote, "forgery-not convicted- probation" and attached an explanation. Her explanation on a separate sheet of paper stated: "To Whom It May Concern, The actual charge was uttering a forged or false instrument. The incident occurred in August of seventy- seven. It involved my sister and I. We were shopping at Burdines and found a credit card in the cosmetic department and attempted to purchase clothes with it. We were observed by security, approached, and later arrested. I went to court and was not convicted but placed on two years probation. I served for eighteen months and was released for good behavior." (Signed) Barbara Ann Bisque Her application failed to disclose that on October 30, 1973, in Broward County Court in Case Numbers 73-33224MM and 73-17493MM she pled nolo contendere to two charges of disorderly conduct. These charges were reduced from initial charges of indecent exposure. She was adjudged guilty and sentenced to a fine and costs. As a result of her failure to disclose her two arrests for indecent exposure and conviction for disorderly conduct, the Respondent Board denied Petitioner's application for registration. Petitioner failed to disclose the two arrests for indecent exposure and her convictions for disorderly conduct due to her mistaken belief that Question number 6 was concerned only with arrests or charges for offenses committed while an adult. It is her recollection that in 1973, at the time of her arrest, she was legally a minor. For this reason, she chose not to disclose those incidents on her application. Her belief, while legally naive, is given credibility by the fact that she did freely disclose her arrest and subsequent probation for forgery.
Recommendation Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED: That the application as submitted by Barbara Ann Bisque be denied, but without prejudice to her filing a new application to demonstrate that she meets the requisite qualifications for licensure as a real estate salesman and that the Board take such further action on the new application as appropriate. DONE and ENTERED this 4th day of February, 1980, in Tallahassee, Florida. MICHAEL PEARCE DODSON Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 4th day of February, 1980. COPIES FURNISHED: Edward F. O'Connor, Esquire 125 Worth Avenue, Suite 308 Palm Beach, Florida 33480 Salvatore A. Carpino, Esquire Staff Attorney Florida Board of Real Estate 400 W. Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802
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 Respondent, Kenneth Wade Willingham, made application to the State of Florida, Department of Professional Regulation, then Board of Real Estate, for licensure as a real estate salesman. (The Board of Real Estate has become the Florida Real Estate Commission.) A copy of the application may be found as Petitioners Exhibit No. 1, admitted into evidence. In the course of the application, the Respondent is asked: Have you ever been arrested for, or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any munici- pality, state or nation including traffic offenses (but not parking, speeding, inspection or traffic signal violations), without regard to whether convicted, sentenced, pardoned or paroled? If yes, state details including the outcome in full: In response to that inquiry, Respondent indicated "DWI in March 1974." Respondent executed the application form by placing his signature on the document to include notarization of his signature in which he stated that he had "carefully read the aforegoing application" and that the answers were true and correct." In the course of the hearing, Respondent verified that he had read the application form to include question number six (6) and had filled in the information set forth in the application. The offense of DWI which occurred in March, 1974, was one in which Respondent entered into a plea bargaining arrangement and was fined and placed upon probation, which probation was successfully completed. No jail sentence was served. On May 24, 1982, the Administrative Complaint, which is the subject of this action, was filed against Respondent and through that complaint it was alleged that Respondent had failed to reveal: arrest on April 25, 1970 in St. Joseph, Missouri, for drunk and disorderly conduct and being found guilty thereof. arrest on April 15, 1972 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for larceny of a motorcycle. arrest on September 28, 1980 in St. Augustine, Florida, for aggravated assault and driving while intoxicated. Respondent requested a Subsection 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, hearing to dispute those allegations and that hearing was conducted on October 6, 1982. On the subject of the alleged arrest of April 25, 1970, in St. Joseph, Missouri, for drunk and disorderly conduct and a finding of guilt for that offense, no proof was offered of an arrest for such an offense, independent of Respondent's testimony and he disclaims those allegations. Petitioner does acknowledge having been arrested in 1972, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, involving an incident related to larceny of a motorcycle. He spent ten (10) days in jail for that matter, after having been fingerprinted. Respondent served one (1) or two (2) years of probation for the incident; however, he disavows responsibility for larceny of a motor vehicle. No other proof was presented. As alleged, in 1980, in St. Augustine, Florida, Respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated and for aggravated assault. In that matter, the Respondent was engaged in a fight and after the fight, drove away from the scene and was apprehended for driving while intoxicated. He was fined at least $1,500-$1,800 and lost his driver's license for one (1) year and spent one (1) night in jail. He is unaware of any probationary period associated with those events and no further evidence was presented by Petitioner on the subject of this arrest. When questioned about his failure to include the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, incident and that matter in St. Augustine, Florida, in the years 1972 and 1980, respectively, Respondent indicated that "apparently I did not understand the magnitude of the essence of this question no. 6 and the way it is worded." At the time of the hearing, Respondent was a boiler- maker/welder and had a part-time job as a real estate salesman working for Bill Kenyon, Ace Real Estate in St. Augustine Beach, Florida.
