Findings Of Fact On or about January 13, 1986, the Petitioner submitted an application to take the real estate salesman's test offered by the Florida Real Estate Commission. This application was received in the offices of the Division of Real Estate on January 15, 1986. Paragraph six on the application form asks: Have you ever been convicted of a crime, found guilty, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere (no contest), even if adjudication was withheld?" Respondent answered "yes" to this question and included the details as follows: "October 3, 1979, West Palm Beach, possession of cocaine, 10 years probation." Court documents reveal that on May 22, 1980, the Petitioner entered a plea of guilty to the charge of possession of cocaine with intent to sell, was found guilty by the court, and was placed on 10 years probation with imposition of sentence withheld. Though there is a slight conflict in dates between that stated by Petitioner and that on the court record, this is accounted for by the former being date of arrest and the latter being date of conviction. The inconsistency is immaterial. Paragraph 11 of the application form asks in pari materia, "(a) Have you, in this state, filed any application for licensure which was denied? If so, state when denied." In response to this question, Petitioner indicated in the affirmative to the issue of whether his licensure was denied and explained that his application for a mortgage solicitor's license was denied by the Department of Finance in 1980 when he failed to disclose arrests in Connecticut when he was 15 and 16 years old. Records maintained by the FBI reveal that on October 8, 1974, he was arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct, was convicted, and was sentenced to 15 days suspended (confinement) and a fine of $75.00. On November 13, 1974, he was arrested on a charge of burglary, larceny, and criminal mischief for which court disposition was unknown because he was a youthful offender. On March 20, 1975, he was arrested on a charge of criminal mischief but the charge was dismissed. On April 4, 1975, he was arrested on a charge of possession of marijuana and a charge of possession of a controlled drug. In each case, he was convicted and sentenced to 30 days suspended (confinement) and 9 months probation. On January 23, 1977, he was arrested for possession of marijuana and possession of a controlled drug, was convicted on the marijuana charge, and was fined $75.00. Charges were dismissed on the other charge. On February 8, 1978, he was arrested on a charge of criminal mischief but the charge was dismissed and not prosecuted. All of "the above arrests and dispositions took place in Newington, Connecticut. On October 3, 1979, Petitioner was arrested in West Palm Beach, Florida, on a charge of trafficking in cocaine and possession of marijuana. He was placed on 10 years probation and this is the offense referred to in Petitioner's answer to question 6. On July 27, 1985, Petitioner was arrested in Lake Worth, Florida, on a charge of sexual assault on a child but charges were dismissed when the complainant failed to show up at the hearing and could not thereafter be found. Notwithstanding the dismissal, a description of the charge was referred to the Florida Real estate Commission by the county. Respondent was born on August 28, 1958, and is at the present time 28 years old. At the time of the arrests in Connecticut, he was 16 to 20 years old. At the time of the cocaine arrest in 1979, he was 21. He has not been convicted of anything since that time and his ten year probation for cocaine conviction was terminated by the Circuit Court three years early on the basis that he had been successfully rehabilitated and further probation was no longer necessary. When Petitioner initially applied for licensure as a mortgage solicitor, he failed to list the juvenile arrests and convictions on the application for that license and when the background investigation was conducted and these arrests and convictions were made known, his license was denied by the Department of Insurance. When he contacted officials of the department, he was told that his failure to list these juvenile arrests and convictions as the basis for denial. After discussion of the situation with them, in which he was advised of the need to fully disclose all relevant factors, he submitted a new complete application and the license was granted. Petitioner claims he has been guilt-free since his conviction in 1980 for the cocaine offense. The subsequent arrests for shoplifting and lewd assault did not result in a conviction in either case. The armed robbery arrest in 1980 was based on the confession of another individual in Connecticut who implicated him in his own confession. The arrest of the confessor took place in Connecticut which attempted to extradite Petitioner from Florida. He was arrested and confined pending extradition for four months, but after hearing, at which it appeared Petitioner had a complete alibi, the extradition action was dismissed. The Commission's denial of licensure to this Petitioner was based on his conviction for possession of cocaine and for his failure to disclose his juvenile convictions in his application for the mortgage solicitor's license. Petitioner does not deny his cocaine conviction but relies on the fact that it took place when he was 21 years old. He has pleaded guilty and has paid a substantial price for his misconduct since that time. Petitioner readily admits the failure to disclose the juvenile convictions on the earlier application, but points out that they were juvenile offenses that took place many years previously; that most had resulted in no charge or suspended sentences; and that he did not realize it was necessary to list juvenile conviction about which he believed the court records were sealed. He admits he was in error and realizes now the need to make full disclosure especially in those areas where the question of integrity is paramount. Petitioner asserts he is not a thief, a child abuser, or a homosexual. He readily admits that he has made several mistakes in his lifetime, but contends that over the past seven years he has maintained a good work record with no disciplinary involvements. He has, over these years, been in the mortgage brokerage business and has even managed several offices. He has never been dishonest and has never stolen. The offenses of which he is guilty in no case related to either larceny or theft and he urges that the fact that he has been terminated from probation three years early, demonstrates his rehabilitation and trustworthiness. Petitioner failed to call any independent witnesses to support his contentions of good character instead relying on his own testimony and his resume, nor were there any submissions of written testimonials. On the other hand, Respondent failed to show any indication of continued bad character or adjudged instances of improper behavior and lack of rehabilitation.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore; RECOMMENDED that Petitioner, Joseph L. Edgerton, be permitted to sit for the Florida Real Estate Salesman Examination. RECOMMENDED in Tallahassee, Florida this 10th day of November, 1986. ARNOLD H. POLLOCK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of November, 1986. COPIES FURNISHED: Joseph L. Edgerton 3868 Victoria Drive West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 Joyous D. Parrish, Esquire Assistant Attorney General, Suite 212 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Fred Roche, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Wings S. Benton, Esquire General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Harold Huff, Executive Director Florida Real Estate Commission 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner is an agency of the State of Florida charged with enforcing the provisions of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes, related to the licensure and the regulation of the practice of real estate brokers and salesmen in the State of Florida. The Respondent is a licensee regulated by the Petitioner pursuant to Chapter 475, Florida Statutes, albeit, holding an inactive license at the present time. Such an inactive licensure status is a sufficient basis for Petitioner's jurisdiction. Boedy v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medical Examiners, 433 So.2d 544, (1st DCA 1983). On or about March 7, 1986, the Respondent was convicted in the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, Florida, of the crime of manslaughter and "DUI/manslaughter," for each of which two counts she was sentenced to a six year prison term which sentences were to run concurrently, with a five year probationary period after the sentences of incarceration were served. In March 1986, the Respondent was duly remitted to the custody of the Department of Corrections and incarcerated at the Women's Prison at Lowell, Florida, the hearing site. The Respondent was in a work release status and was about to transfer to a less restrictive custodial situation in Fort Lauderdale in the Department's work release program at the time of the hearing. She will work in this program in the community for a few months before her ultimate release. Her release will come much sooner than the original length of her sentence imposed by the Court because she has earned the maximum amount of "gain-time" and has been a model prisoner, thus not losing any gain time since the first day she was incarcerated. This incident arose on May 23, 1983, in Pinellas County when the Respondent was proceeding down a public roadway in her own motor vehicle after having ingested an indeterminate amount of alcoholic beverages. While she was driving, a deputy sheriff in a Sheriff's Department vehicle approached her from the rear, activated his siren and indicated that he intended apprehending her or at least stopping her car. The deputy's siren startled and distracted the Respondent and in the process of pulling over to the side of the road, which necessitated a lane change, she became involved in the auto accident which ultimately caused the death of Mr. Walter Heuston. She was charged with unlawfully causing the death of Mr. Heuston by the operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicating liquor to an extent as to deprive her of full possession of her normal faculties and, in Count II of the criminal information, by her own act or culpable negligence, in driving a motor vehicle, without intent to murder, inflicting mortal wounds upon Walter Heuston, of which he died. The Respondent, at the hearing and repeatedly in the past, has displayed extreme remorse over this unfortunate turn of events and freely acknowledges her fault in so conducting herself as to cause the death of another. As established by other witnesses, as well as by those, whose letters attesting to her good character were stipulated into evidence, she has used this experience and her time in prison to better herself. She has become quite active in a Christian organization for women and has enrolled in a theological seminary. In her course work with the seminary, she has earned the highest possible grades. Her pre-release counselor, Reverend Randolph, established that she is interested in growing and improving her life and remains very interested in her profession and in helping her community. The Respondent presently works at a community college as a civilian secretarial worker and has an exemplary record. At the correctional institution, she works in orienting inmates and counseling them to help them adjust to prison life and also works as a chaplain's aide. Similarly, Reverend Hubert Parr, the Respondent's minister, established that she is a member of his church and that he has had frequent contact with her in his Bible study teaching at the Lowell Prison. The Respondent has proven to him that she has grown a great deal as a responsible, caring person and is very repentant concerning the incident which resulted in her incarceration. He truly feels she aspires to be a model citizen in the future. He has substantial experience working as a chaplain and counselor for a drug and alcohol rehabilitation center. He is convinced that the Respondent has conquered any alcohol problem she may have had and is convinced she has, and wishes to continue to, change her life for the better. The Respondent established that she had no prior alcohol problems of record and had no traffic citations for driving under the influence or even for speeding before the incident in question. She has conscientiously worked at her studies with the Luther Rice Seminary in Jacksonville and genuinely wants to help other people who may have alcohol or drug problems. She wishes to use her own unfortunate experience to the advantage of others by counseling persons with alcohol problems to help them avoid similar disastrous consequences. She presently works at the Central Florida Community College and has an excellent work record and numerous letters of recommendation. Her work site away from the correctional institution renders drugs and alcohol easily accessible, yet she has steadfastly avoided them and has been involved in no incident involving the purchase or use of alcohol or drugs in the course of her work experience away from the Lowell facility. She is in the honor unit at the Lowell facility, could "walk away" at any time and has chosen not to do so. She is in all respects a model prisoner, is contrite and remorseful concerning the reason for her imprisonment and genuinely appears to be trying to turn that tragic experience into a positive benefit in redirecting the course of her own life and in using that bad experience to help others who may have similar problems. Concerning the charge that she failed to timely inform the Petitioner of her incarceration or her conviction, she established that she wrote the Petitioner in early April 1986 and within thirty days after her conviction but apparently sent the letter to the wrong address in Orlando instead of to the appropriate address in Tallahassee. She never got an answer and during this time was still in the reception facility for a thirty day period during which she was in close custody and confinement. It was, therefore, difficult for her to obtain information about where to write to the Petitioner to inform them of her situation and, because of the emotional stress she was under at the time, she did not immediately write another letter upon failing to get an answer to the first one after a reasonable time. In any event, later that summer, in August 1986, she wrote a second letter to the Petitioner informing it of her situation and inquiring about her licensure status. This was answered by the Board and ultimately resulted in the instant prosecution. The Respondent was sentenced on March 7 and did not arrive at the Lowell Prison with a permanent address until March 21. She wrote the first letter in the second week of April. In view of the Respondent's obvious remorse concerning the unfortunate incident which resulted in her conviction and incarceration and the fact that she obviously wishes to better herself both spiritually and professionally, and has a genuine desire to help others overcome alcohol or drug problems and avoid similar consequences, it cannot be found that the Respondent's conviction of a felony and resultant incarceration is truly representative of her innate character and individual self-worth as that relates to her competence and trustworthiness to practice her profession as a realtor. The undersigned finds no evidence which would indicate that the public in the State of Florida, requiring the services of the Respondent as a realtor in the future, would be in any danger of becoming victims of dishonest, deceitful, fraudulent or similar reprehensible modes of practice by the Respondent. In consideration of the severe penalty the Respondent has already paid and is continuing to pay for the tragedy she is accountable for, it would be unjust to remove her right to practice her chosen means of livelihood through this proceeding.
Recommendation Having considered the foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, the evidence of record, the candor and demeanor of the witnesses, and the pleadings and arguments of the parties, it is, therefore RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered by the Florida Real Estate Commission according the Respondent the penalty of a written reprimand. DONE and ORDERED this 31st day of August 1987, in Tallahassee, Florida. P. MICHAEL RUFF 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 31st day of August, 1987. COPIES FURNISHED: Arthur R. Shell, Jr., Esquire Senior Attorney Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 June E. Dupee c/o Salvation Army 14 Northwest 14th Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33311 Harold Huff, Executive Director Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Van Poole, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750 Joseph A. Sole, Esquire General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750
The Issue The issue to determine in this matter is whether Petitioner Darryl Maurice Young’s application for real estate license should be denied for the reasons stated in Respondent Department of Business Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission’s (Commission), Notice of Intent to Deny, rendered April 5, 2018.
Findings Of Fact On January 22, 2018, Mr. Young submitted a State of Florida, Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission, Application for Sales Associate License, Form # DBPR RE 1. Background question 1, in Mr. Young’s application, asks, in part: Have you ever been convicted or found guilty of, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, regardless of adjudication, a crime in any jurisdiction, or are you currently under criminal investigation? Mr. Young provided the following explanation for Background question 1: DUI Manslaughter Duval/Orlando, Florida 20 years in prison; 1 year probation May 3, 1997. Additionally, the Commission presented, through FDLE and court records, Mr. Young’s lengthy past criminal offenses and convictions, dating 2/07/1987 back to 1987: Petty theft with prior 2/17/1987 Petty theft 6/01/1987 Burglary (dismissed when pled to above charges) 11/04/1987 Petty theft (merchandise) 8/29/1988 Burglary Petty theft and prior jail offenses Convicted/committed to prison 10/26/1988 Petty theft with priors CA Medical Facility Sentence - 1 year, 4 months 1/02/1991 Petty theft with priors Sentence - 2 years, state prison 1/30/1991 Petty theft Sentence – state prison 3/26/1992 Petty theft with priors Sentence - state prison 8/10/1995 Shoplifting/petit theft Resisting merchant Convicted of both misdemeanors 6/18/1996 Aggravated assault with weapon Felony conviction 7/08/1996 Fraud – failure to deliver a hired vehicle Felony conviction 5/03/1997 Resisting officer with violence Felony conviction 7/22/1997 Violation of Probation (Fraud) Felony conviction 8/22/1997 Violation of Probation (DUI Manslaughter) Felony conviction 8/22/1997 Leaving the scene of an accident Felony conviction 7/13/1999 DUI Manslaughter DUI with serious bodily injury Felony conviction Sentence - 20 years, 5 months, and 7 days While in prison for the 20-plus year sentence for DUI Manslaughter, Mr. Young completed a substance abuse program, and a faith-based residential program. The Florida Department of Corrections discharged Mr. Young from supervision (probation) on April 25, 2016. Michelle Gordon testified that she has known Mr. Young since his release from prison, has had a friendly working relationship with Mr. Young, and that she shared a few culinary classes with him. She further testified that he was a helpful and nice person. Tracy Pray testified that she too has known Mr. Young since his release from prison, and that Mr. Young had assisted her in obtaining a food truck, and that they worked together for about two years. Ms. Pray testified that Mr. Young voluntarily helped her complete the paperwork for the food truck operation. Geneva Carter testified that she works for PRIDE Enterprises as a transition specialist. She testified that she helped Mr. Young gain some useful work experience while he was incarcerated. Ms. Carter further testified that she met with him briefly on two occasions after his release to help him make the transition from prison to working outside of prison. Petitioner failed to establish the following requirements for a real estate sales associate license: that he is honest, trustworthy, of good character, has a reputation for fair dealing, and he is competent and qualified to make real estate transactions and conduct negotiations with safety to investors and others. Petitioner also failed to overcome the disqualification for eligibility found in section 475.25(1)(f), which results from convictions to multiple crimes involving moral turpitude or fraudulent or dishonest dealing. Based on Mr. Young’s failure to appear and offer evidence, there is no evidentiary basis on which findings can be made that he satisfied the requirements for a real estate sales associate license.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Commission issue a final order deny Mr. Young’s application for licensure as a real estate sales associate. DONE AND ENTERED this 31st day of May, 2019, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ROBERT J. TELFER III 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 31st day of May, 2019.
The Issue The issue is whether Kramer is guilty of violation of Section 474.25(2), Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact Kenneth Stephen Kramer is a licensed real estate salesman holding License No. 0193029 issued by the Florida Real Estate Commission. Kramer filed an application for registration as a real estate salesman, dated November 21, 1977. In answer to paragraph 6, Kramer stated "Yes," and attached a letter of explanation from Michael Brodsky, attorney at law. Brodsky's letter dealt with Kramer's arrest for robbery in Opa Locka, Florida, and the subsequent dismissal of the charges against him on the basis of misidentification by the complaining witness. See Exhibit 2. An arrest report from Orangeburg, New York, was introduced as Exhibit This arrest report shows that Kenneth Stephen Kramer was arrested in Orangeburg for possession of marijuana. Kramer testified concerning his arrest in Orangeburg. His testimony was substantiated by that of his sister and his wife. Their testimony was uncontroverted that Kramer had been arrested together with his sister and wife and tow other males in Orangeburg for the possession of marijuana. On the basis of the representations of their court appointed counsel, they plead guilty to the charges against them with the understanding that they would receive three- years probation at the end of which their records would be expunged. They successfully served their probations and were advised by the probation officer in the State of Florida that their records would be expunged. Kramer stated that this was the reason he had not reported his arrest because he felt that his record had been expunged upon the satisfactory completion of his probation as was represented by his court appointed counsel and Florida probation officer.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that the Florida Real Estate Commission take no action against the registration of Kenneth Steven Kramer. DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of October, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Kenneth Steven Kramer 901 Northeast 23rd Court Pompano Beach, Florida 33064 Tina Hipple, Esquire Florida Real Estate Commission 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32802 ================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER ================================================================= FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESS DOCKET NO. 3372 BROWARD COUNTY KENNETH STEVEN KRAMER, DOAH NO. 78-1431 Defendant. /
Findings Of Fact Petitioner here, Kenneth G. Bray, on May 31, 1983, filed an application for licensure as a real estate salesman in Florida with the Florida Real Estate Commission on its application form, which was received by the Commission on June 9, 1983. Received that same date was the addendum to the real estate salesman's application, signed by Petitioner, which, according to the form itself, is to be answered instead of Question 6 on the basic application form. Petitioner answered Question 6 on both forms. Question 6 on the basic application form states: Have you ever been arrested for, or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation includ- ing 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 answer to that question, Petitioner replied: D.W.I. Daytona Beach (Fined) 1982 1968 N.Y. Drugs, poss. larceny & sale (turned over to military) On the addendum filed the same date, the question asked is somewhat different, reading: Have you ever been convicted of a crime, found guilty, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere (no contest), even if adjudication was withheld? To this question, Petitioner answered with the same information as contained in the answer to Question 6 on the basic application form. A printout of Petitioner's Florida arrest record by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement dated June 29, 1983, reflects that Petitioner was arrested by officers of the Daytona Beach Police Department on November 28, 1982, for: Driving under the influence of liquor Possession of under 20 grams of marijuana Resisting an arresting officer without violence. Petitioner indicates all three offenses were part of the same incident and arrest, that he was fined for the offense of driving under the influence of liquor, and that the remaining two charges were dropped. Respondent offered no evidence to rebut this contention, and it is, therefore, found as fact that Petitioner was not convicted of either the marijuana offense or of resisting arrest. Petitioner admits these latter two allegations were not listed on either form at Question 6 because they were all a part of the same arrest and he was not convicted of either. Further, these two omitted offenses were less serious than those he did list, such as the 1960 drug offense when he was a 21- year-old military member and the DUI. At the time the applications were submitted, he was under some problem to get them in because of an impending test date, and he omitted those two offenses. Thereafter, he telephonically contacted a representative of Respondent Real Estate Commission in Orlando, a lady named Ruth (Clayton), to whom he explained his omissions. According to Petitioner, she told him to write a letter to the Commission outlining the offenses he omitted, and he contends he did so. He does not have a copy of his letter, however, nor was a copy offered by Respondent.
Recommendation Based on the above, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner, if otherwise qualified, be issued a license as a real estate salesman in Florida. RECOMMENDED this 3rd day of February, 1984, in Tallahassee, Florida. ARNOLD H. POLLOCK 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 3rd day of February, 1984. COPIES FURNISHED: Ralph Armstead, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs 400 West Robinson Street Suite 212 Orlando, Florida 32801 Mr. Harold Huff, Director Division of Real Estate Department of Professional Regulation Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Mr. Fred Roche Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Kenneth G. Bray 2617 South Atlantic Avenue Daytona Beach Shores, Florida 32018
Findings Of Fact At all times material to these proceedings, the Respondent was the holder of Florida real estate license number 0201688. The last license issued was as a nonactive broker with a home address of 2281 Euclid Avenues Fort Myers, Florida. On December 10, 1986, the Respondent entered a plea of guilty to the offense of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud in Case No. 861034CF in the Circuit Court of Lee County, Florida. The crime did not involve any business dealings in which the Respondent was acting as a real estate salesman or broker. The Respondent did not notify the Petitioner in writing of his plea within the thirty-day period because he believed he had entered a plea to a misdemeanor, which was exempt from the reporting requirement of 475.25(1)(p), Florida Statutes. A letter from his attorney before the plea was entered reflected an intent to enter a plea to a misdemeanor, subject to acceptance by the court. On July 15, 1987, in Case No. 86-1790CF in the Circuit Court of Lee County, Florida, the Respondent entered nolo contendere pleas to uttering a forged instrument in Counts I, III, V, VII, IX, XI, and XIII and grand theft in Counts II, VI, VIII, X, XII, and XIV. These charges involved personal business affairs and did not involve misconduct by the Respondent as a real estate salesman or broker. The Respondent notified the Florida Real Estate Commission of his adjudication of guilt for the grand thefts and the utterings of forged instruments in Case No. 86-1790CF by letter dated August 7, 1987. There are no specific findings of mitigating or aggravating circumstances as none were presented during the hearing of this case.
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.
The Issue Whether the Respondent's real estate license #0067819 should be suspended, or whether he should be otherwise disciplined.
Findings Of Fact The Respondent, Jeffry G. Pearl, is a registered real estate salesman and was so registered at all times pertinent to this hearing. An Administrative Complaint was issued against him on June 27, 1979. An answer was filed on July 30, 1979, together with a Motion to Quash and a request for an administrative hearing. The Petitioner Commission forwarded the request to the Division of Administrative Hearings on August 7, 1979. The Motion to Quash was denied September 13, 1979, after review of the Memorandum of Law submitted. Prior to the beginning of the formal hearing, the Respondent re-argued the Motion to Quash, challenging inter alia the constitutionality of the statute under which the complaint was issued. The Motion was again denied. Count II of the previously filed Administrative Complaint was dropped upon an oral motion to amend by the petitioner Commission. On September 15, 1978, Respondent Pearl was arrested and charged with possession of controlled drugs, driving under the influence, and possession with intent to distribute, contrary to Sections 893.13 and 316.193, Florida Statutes. Respondent pleaded guilty on February 9, 1979, to possession of controlled substances [three (3) counts] and was convicted of the offenses on that date. The imposition of sentence was stayed and withheld, and he was placed on probation and released into the custody of the Department of Offender Rehabilitation for a term of five (5) years. The condition of probation was that he pay a fine of $5,000.00. The Respondent is now and has been on probation since February 9, 1979, and is subject to terms and conditions "to be set forth by further order of the court." Respondent Pearl admitted that on September 15, 1978, he was driving in Miami, Florida, and was arrested while under the influence of drugs. A large amount of cash and drugs was found in his automobile. The Respondent admitted that he had been addicted to drugs of all types, including marijuana and cocaine. After his arrest Respondent was imprisoned, but before his case came to trial he entered a hospital in Miami, Florida, and thereafter went to the Palm Beach Institute, a treatment center aligned with Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous. He was discharged from the Palm Beach Institute in January of 1979, and has continued treatment on an outpatient basis. The Respondent stated that he has been drug-free since January of 1979, and that he started back to work with Miami Beach Realty on a full-time basis in April of 1979. Respondent Pearl presented as a witness Dr. Jose Almedia, a physician specializing in psychiatry. Dr. Almedia stated that the Respondent had not taken drugs of any kind to his knowledge from October of 1978, to September of 1979. He said that the Respondent is at present mentally clear, pleased with himself and his family, and that he is a completely different person from the time he first saw him in 1978. Dr. Almedia said that he believes the Respondent has turned his life around, and that since he has a job and goals the Respondent now has something for which to look forward. A second witness for Respondent Pearl was Melvin Black, an attorney specializing in criminal law. Mr. Black stated that the Respondent had originally been incarcerated for about a week, and that after he, as Respondent's attorney, had obtained a bond for the Respondent he became concerned not only with the criminal charges against the Respondent but also with his well-being. Black advised the presiding judge that Respondent Pearl was undergoing treatment, that he had voluntarily admitted himself for treatment, and the circuit judge had postponed the proceedings pending the completion of the treatment. Thereafter, about five (5) months later, a plea of guilty to the three (3) counts of possession of drugs was entered. Charges as to driving under the influence and possession with intent to distribute were not pressed. The probationary sentence and fine were the results of Respondent Pearl's conviction on the charges to which he had pleaded guilty. Certified copies of said conviction were entered into evidence. Respondent submitted a memorandum of law on December 7, 1979. The memorandum has been considered in the writing of this order. No memorandum was submitted by the Petitioner Board.
Recommendation Inasmuch as the Respondent, Jeffry G. Pearl, has embarked on a strenuous period of rehabilitation and appears to be successful at this point in time, it is recommended that his license be suspended for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this order, and that after the expiration of said suspension an investigation be made by the Petitioner Commission to determine whether such suspension should be extended. DONE and ORDERED this 19th day of December, 1979, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND 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 19th day of December, 1979. COPIES FURNISHED: Mark A. Grimes, Esquire Board of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Scott T. Eber, Esquire 151 South East 14th Terrace Miami, Florida 33131
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 Respondent is duly registered as a real estate salesman and as a broker by Florida Real Estate Commission. On his application for registration as a salesman, in answer to question 9 on the application as to whether he had ever been arrested for, or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation, he answered "yes" and completed the "If yes, state details in full" part of the question with "traffic citation (speeding) 1970." On his application for registration as a broker some 16 months later he answered Question 9 "no". Exhibit 2, a certified copy of the court of record of Broward County, shows that on April 28, 1970, Respondent pleaded nolo contendere to the offense of attempted bookmaking and was fined $50. When questioned by the investigator for the Florida Real Estate Commission prior to the filing of this information, Respondent admitted that he had been arrested in California in 1960 and 1961 on charges of suspicion of assault and a traffic offense involving driving while under the influence of intoxicants. Testifying in his own behalf Respondent acknowledged that he had inadvertently failed to include those arrests on his application, and that in so doing he had no intention to conceal those arrests. The arrests for suspicion of assault involved a marital dispute with his former wife and those charges were dismissed. On the DWI charge he was fined $150. The breathalizer test he had taken was borderline and he was advised by the Public Defender that if he pleaded guilty he would be fined $150 as a first offender and if he employed the services of a lawyer to contest the charge the attorney's fee would be at least $250. He pleaded guilty to the charge. The attempted bookmaking arrest occurred while he was working in a bar in Deerfield Beach. The police suspected this bar was involved in bookmaking. Fetters had worked there only a week or two when two undercover agents, who had patronized the bar on a daily basis for several days, asked him to place a bet for them. He told them he had no information on how to place a bet, but after they insisted he took their money and made a call to someone he knew in Miami. The undercover agents then identified themselves and arrested him. Respondent holds a Cosmetology license in California, and an insurance salesman's license. He is currently working for Nichols' Realty in Boca Raton. His broker, Roy Nichols, has known Respondent for about three years and Respondent's reputation in the community is excellent. He has found Respondent's conduct exemplary both as a real estate salesman and as a family man.
