Findings Of Fact The Respondent, Donald D. Johnson, holds Florida teaching certificate No. 468965, which is valid through June 30, 1984. On November 15, 1979, the Respondent filed his application for Florida teacher's certificate, upon which he swore that he had not been convicted of a crime. That application was received by the Petitioner on December 10, 1979, and after processing, his teaching certificate was issued to him on December 20, 1979. The Respondent pled guilty to a charge of petit larceny, and adjudication of guilt was withheld on or about March 13, 1977. The Respondent also pled guilty to a charge of driving with an unlawful blood alcohol level and was adjudicated guilty thereof on or about September 5, 1979. The Petitioner established that the Respondent failed to disclose these altercations with the criminal justice system on his application for his Florida teacher's certificate. In fact, he affirmatively swore that he had not been convicted of a crime. The Petitioner, in at least seventeen (17) recent cases, has followed a policy of imposing at least a one-year suspension and sometimes a one-year revocation in cases such as this. The Petitioner also established that its historical policy has been to grant licensure when an applicant has disclosed such criminal violations on his application, but it has consistently revoked, and has been upheld in revoking, certificates for affirmative misrepresentations by applicants on their applications for certificates to the effect that they have had no criminal convictions when such is not the case. There is no question that the Respondent falsified his application and falsely maintained that he had no criminal convictions. There is also no question that his certificate to teach in the State of Florida was initially issued to him by the Petitioner in reliance upon that misrepresentation, which reliance has been proven to be misplaced.
Recommendation Having considered the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the evidence in the record and the the pleadings and arguments of counsel for the Petitioner, it is, therefore, RECOMMENDED: That the Education Practices Commission enter a final order revoking the Respondent's teaching certificate for a period of one (1) year. DONE and ENTERED this 21st day of June, 1982 at Tallahassee, Florida. P. MICHAEL RUFF 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 23rd day of June, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: J. David Holder, BERG & HOLDER P.O. Box 1694 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Donald D. Johnson 5856 Wiltshire Drive Jacksonville, Florida 32216 Donald L. Griesheimer, Executive Director Education Practices Commissioner Department of Education The Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 The Honorable Ralph D. Turlington Commissioner Department of Education The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301
The Issue The issue in this case is whether Respondent's license as a teacher in the State of Florida should be disciplined.
Findings Of Fact At all times relevant to this proceeding, Respondent, Daniel Klahn, was the holder of Florida teaching certificate 634054. The certificate is for the area of Social Studies and was valid through June 30, 1994. During the 1990-1991 school year, Mr. Klahn was employed as a teacher by the Taylor County School Board. Mr. Klahn and his wife have two sons, Daniel M. Klahn, II, and John D. Klahn. During the 1990-1991 school year, Mr. Klahn and his wife decided they wanted to adopt a female child. Toward this end, they agreed to be foster parents for the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. L. S., a nine-year-old female child was placed as a foster child in the Klahns' home during the 1991-1992 school year. L. S. was born on May 3, 1982. She underwent surgery for ruptured blood vessels in her brain shortly after she was born. L. S. suffers from epilepsy. In approximately 1987, L. S. lived with her mother, step-father and two half-brothers. L. S. reported that her step-father had been sexually abusing her. L. S. was taken out of the home and placed in foster care as a result of her allegations against her step-father. L. S. ultimately admitted that it had been one of her step-brothers, Nathan Wheeler, that had abused her and not her step-father. Nathan was approximately 16 or 17 when the incident was reported by L. S. L. S. had originally accused her step-father because she had been told by Nathan that he would kill or otherwise harm her mother and step-father if she ever told on him. Nathan was eventually moved out of L. S.'s home. L. S. was not, however, allowed to go back to her mother for two years. During the two years that L. S. was in foster care she lived in four different foster care households, including Mr. Klahn's. Mr. Klahn's home was the fourth foster care home L. S. was placed in. She stayed in the home for approximately 3 months. L. S. was approximately 8 or 9 years old while she lived with Mr. Klahn. L. S., as a result of having been sexually abused, having been taken away from her mother and having been placed in various foster homes, was anxious to get back to her mother. When she was unhappy about a foster home, she would act out and become unruly. L. S. did not like being in Mr. Klahn's home. She believed that Mr. and Ms. Klahn treated her harder than they did their two sons. Mr. and Ms. Klahn were not very understanding of her situation and treated her as a child who simply lacked discipline. As a result of these facts and those described in finding of fact 13, L. S.'s grades started to slip and she became more troublesome. While in Mr. Klahn's home, L. S. continued to visit on occasion with the family that she had previously lived with, the Bennetts. At some point, L. S. reported to the Ms. Bennett that Mr. Klahn was abusing her. She eventually reported the alleged incidents to her mother. The alleged incidents reported by L. S., which form the bases of the Administrative Complaint against Mr. Klahn, are as follows: the Respondent inappropriately touched L. S. in the chest and vaginal area. when L. S. misbehaved the Respondent and his wife held down L. S. and attempted to place pepper in her mouth. The Respondent and his wife then placed liquid soap on L. S.'s mouth; the Respondent applied medication to L. S.'s vaginal area; the Respondent made inappropriate suggestive comments in front of L. S. Alleged Inappropriate Touching. The evidence failed to prove that Mr. Klahn "touched L. S. in the chest and vaginal area", except as discussed, infra. Pepper and Soap Incident. On one occasion, L. S. was in the dining room doing homework. Mr. Klahn was attempting to assist her when she became angry and threw a temper tantrum. L. S. called Ms. Klahn a "mother fucking witch." When she did, Ms. Klahn picked up a pepper shaker and told L. S. to stick out her tongue. L. S. refused. Ms. Klahn then went into the kitchen and got the dish washing liquid soap and returned to the dining room. Ms. Klahn then put soap on L. S.'s lips. Mr. Klahn had to hold L. S. in order for Ms. Klahn to put the soap on L. S.'s lips. Vaginal Medication. Shortly after being placed in Mr. Klahn's home, L. S. was diagnosed as suffering from a yeast infection. Medication for the infection was prescribed by a physician. Mr. Klahn applied the medicine to L. S.'s vaginal area. L. S. felt that she was old enough to put the medicine on herself or that Ms. Klahn should have put the medicine on rather than Mr. Klahn. L. S. did not, however, tell Mr. Klahn how she felt. The evidence failed to prove that Mr. Klahn put the medicine on L. S. because she refused to do it herself or because she refused to let anyone except Mr. Klahn put the medicine on. Suggestive Comments. The evidence failed to prove that Mr. Klahn made inappropriate suggestive comments in front of L. S.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered dismissing the Administrative Complaint against Daniel Klahn. DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of April, 1995, 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 3rd day of April, 1995. COPIES FURNISHED: Robert J. Boyd, Esquire Post Office Box 26 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 J. Victor Africano, Esquire Post Office Box 1450 Live Oak, Florida 32060 Karen B. Wilde Florida Department of Education The Florida Education Center Room 301 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Kathleen M. Richards, Administrator Professional Practices Services 352 Florida Education Center 325 Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399
The Issue Whether Petitioner's application for a Florida Educator's Certificate should be granted.
Findings Of Fact In 1986, Petitioner, Scott William Katz (Katz), applied for a Florida Educator's Certificate, and his application was denied by Final Order issued on September 3, 1987. His application was denied for the following reasons. In 1984, Katz received a private reprimand from the Florida Supreme Court for threatening criminal prosecution to gain advantage in a civil matter. In 1986, Katz was disbarred from the practice of law in Florida for representing one party in a divorce proceeding after having previously represented the opposing party; misrepresenting a material fact in a sworn pleading he filed in Federal District Court; and coercing a former client into paying him for a claim that had no legal basis. In July and August 1986, Katz engaged in the practice of law or held himself out as an attorney after being disbarred from the practice of law in Florida. As a result of his being disbarred in Florida, Katz was disbarred from the practice of law in Oklahoma. In 1990, Katz again applied for a Florida Educator's Certificate. Katz's application was denied by Final Order dated December 6, 1991, based on his failure to establish rehabilitation and good moral character. The Final Order adopted the Recommendation of the Recommended Order, which stated: On the basis of all the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be issued in this case denying the Petitioner's application for a Florida teaching certificate because of the failure of the Petitioner to establish his rehabilitation and present good moral character, such denial to be without prejudice to the refiling of a future application at such time as the Petitioner believes he can prove his rehabilitation and good moral character. On June 27, 1991, Katz pled nolo contendere to a charge of trespassing after warning in Palm Beach County Court, Case number 91-6009MM-A02. Adjudication was withheld, and Katz was placed on probation for six months. Probation was revoked. On December 20, 1991, Katz was convicted in Palm Beach County Court of trespassing after warning in Case number 91-6009MM-A02 and violation of a restraining order in Case number 91-8001MM- A02. On February 21, 1992, Katz was adjudicated guilty of petit theft in Palm Beach County Court Case number 91-10102, after having pled nolo contendere to the charge. Katz applied for readmission to the Oklahoma Bar Association four times. Two of his petitions were untimely filed. The third and fourth petitions were denied on the merits. In Matter of Reinstatement of Katz, 907 F.2d 1029 (Okl. 1995), the Supreme Court of Oklahoma denied his latest application and stated that Katz: . . . had also attempted to mislead this Court by indicating in his brief that twelve letters from various high ranking officials vouch for his good moral character. In fact, only two of the letters contain recommendations of any kind. The other letters make no comments whatsoever as to his character. Id. at 1032. Katz is well educated and has obtained numerous degrees. At various times from 1981 until August 1998, Katz worked as substitute teacher for the Palm Beach County School District. From August 1998 to December 1998, Katz was employed as an interim teacher, a temporary teaching position, at Olympics High School. In December 1998, Katz was barred from employment with the Palm Beach County school system. In the late afternoon of December 1, 1998, Katz was at home with his wife, Violet, and his stepchildren, Issac, Stephanie, and Enrique Sasson. Issac was seven years old. Katz became upset with Issac because he failed to flush the toilet. Katz grabbed Issac, hit him, and took him outside, saying that he was going to take Issac to Issac's grandmother's house to live. Katz hit the child when they were outside with an open hand and a closed fist and tried to force Issac into the car. Issac banged his leg on the car door as Katz was attempting to push Issac into the back seat. A few minutes later, Katz and the child went back inside their home. Issac had a loose baby tooth prior to the incident with Katz. According to Issac and Enrique, Issac pulled the tooth while they were at the dinner table after Katz brought Issac back into the house. After the incident, Katz left home and went to work at his evening job. After Katz left, Amy Sinnott, an officer for the West Palm Beach Police Department, was called to the Katz home to investigate allegations of child abuse. Officer Sinnott arrived at the Katz home a few minutes before 9:00 p.m., and found Violet Katz, Issac Sasson, Stephanie Sasson, and Violet Katz's parents. Officer Sinnott interviewed Violet Katz, who appeared upset but was rational and coherent. Out of the presence of the children in the house, Ms. Katz told the police officer that Issac had not flushed the toilet and Katz told her to punish the children. She decided to withhold television privileges for a week. Katz was unhappy with the punishment that she was going to administer to Issac. Katz grabbed Issac, threw him about the living room, hit him with an open hand, and dragged Issac outside, saying that he was going to take Issac to his grandparents' house to live. Officer Sinnott saw Issac, who was missing a front baby tooth and had bruises on his arm and inner thigh. There was some blood on Issac's shirt. Issac indicated that his thigh hurt. Photographs were taken at the scene showing the injuries. Officer Sinnott has had training in interviewing children who are alleged victims. She took Issac aside to question him so that neither his mother nor his grandparents were nearby. She did not allow anyone to tell or suggest to him how he should answer her questions. She did not tell Issac what his mother had told her during the mother's interview. Issac told Officer Sinnott that Katz was upset with him for not flushing the toilet, grabbed his arm and threw him around the apartment, where he banged into the couch and wall. He said that Katz took him outside and hit him as they was going outside. Once outside, Katz tried to push Issac into the car to go to Issac's grandparents' house, and Issac banged his leg against the car door. The areas of bruising on Issac's body were consistent with the areas in which Issac told her that he had been injured. Officer Sinnott also interviewed Issac's sister, Stephanie, in a manner similar to Issac's interview. Stephanie was questioned away from the others, and Officer Sinnott did not tell Stephanie what either Issac or his mother had said. Stephanie told Officer Sinnott that she was looking out her glass sliding window when Katz took Issac outside. She saw Katz hit Issac with an open hand and a closed fist and drag him to the car, where he tried to put Issac in the backseat. Issac was banging his legs against the car door. After the police left the Katz home, Issac's mother took him to the children's emergency room at St. Mary's Hospital. The triage nurse on duty took a medical history from Issac's mother. In a calm and straight forward manner, Mrs. Katz told the nurse that the injuries for which Issac was being seen resulted from Katz' hitting the child. The mother told the nurse that Issac had been hit on the side of the head, face, back of legs, hips, buttocks, and underarm. The triage nurse did not recall any bruising to Issac's mouth. She noted that Issac had bruising to the back of his legs After the triage nurse finished getting information from Issac's mother, Issac was examined by Dr. Jeffery Hoffman, who found contusions to Issac's body in several locations. There were bruises on the right arm, interior chest walls, inner thighs, and buttocks. The injuries were consistent with the history provided by the mother. The coloration of the bruises on the inner thigh indicated that the bruises resulted from injuries sustained no later than 48 to 72 hours earlier. The bruises on the arm came from injuries that occurred on the outside of 12 to 24 hours earlier. Dr. Hoffman did not observe any lacerations or cuts around the gum line where the lost baby tooth had been located. However, in his experience he had seen teeth knocked out from a variety of causes which do not cause trauma around the tooth area. On December 2, 1998, Issac went to the school nurse, complaining that his arm was hurting. When asked to show the nurse where he was hurting, Issac pointed to his right upper back. The nurse lifted Issac's shirt and noticed four dark areas on his upper back and also noticed a dark area at the right nipple. Issac told the nurse that his father had picked him up the night before and had thrown him on the bed. At the final hearing, Issac testified that he had gotten the injuries to his arm and inner thigh during recess on the same day that he went to the clinic to complain about his arm hurting. He stated that the injuries to his arm occurred when he was on the monkey bars and that the bruises to his inner thigh happened when he was playing football. At the final hearing, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge questioned Issac about his injuries. THE COURT: . . .Issac, on the day that the police came, has your - had your Daddy hit you that day? THE WITNESS: No. THE COURT: So, how did you get- you had-- When you went to the hospital, did have marks on your - on your body? THE WITNESS: Right here. THE COURT: And did you have any on your back? THE WITNESS: Lots. THE COURT: How did you get the marks there? THE WITNESS: With the - because I was on the monkey bars? THE COURT: What - looks like you're asking me a question. Do you know or not know? THE WITNESS: Not know. THE COURT: You don't know how you got the marks? THE WITNESS: I just think it's from the monkey bars. After Issac's testimony, Katz stated: . . . He said the monkey bars. That's news to me too, your honor. It is clear that Issac's injuries were not caused from playing on the monkey bars or from playing football. Katz' explanation for Issac's bruising was that Issac and his older brother Enrique had been wrestling a couple of days before December 1, 1998, and Issac got the bruises while he was in a wrestling hold called the Tequila Sunrise. Katz indicated that he had caught the two boys wrestling, chastised them, and told them not to do any more wrestling. However, Enrique testified that they were caught wrestling a couple of weeks before Issac was injured. He further testified that they had obeyed Katz and had not engaged in any wrestling after that. Thus, Issac's injuries were not caused from wrestling with his older brother. Katz was arrested and charged with aggravated child abuse. The case was later nolle prossed.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered permanently denying Scott William Katz' application for a Florida Educator's Certificate. DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of November, 1999, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. SUSAN B. KIRKLAND Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of November, 1999. COPIES FURNISHED: Scott William Katz 1877 North Congress Avenue, No. 10-D West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-1661 Bruce P. Taylor, Esquire Post Office Box 131 St. Petersburg, Florida 33731-0131 Kathleen Richards, Executive Director Education Practices Commission Florida Education Center 325 West Gaines Street, Room 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Jerry W. Whitmore, Program Director Professional Practices Services Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street, Room 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Michael H. Olenick, General Counsel Department of Education The Capitol, Suite 1701 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Findings Of Fact Respondent has been employed by Petitioner as a teacher's aide in a mentally handicapped classroom for the past three years. Prior to her employment, Respondent, who is the mother of a handicapped child, worked as a volunteer classroom aide. She is active in the Parent Teacher Association and is a girl scout leader. Respondent attended an orientation session at the beginning of the 1983-84 school year where school policies were discussed. However, she does not remember any explanation of corporal punishment policy and did not receive a copy of Petitioner's rules on this subject. Respondent has had no formal training in education and is not certificated. Respondent recalls a discussion at the beginning of the school year with the special education teacher who was her supervisor. The teacher advised Respondent not to hit Robert Pelligrino because his sister would likely take legal action. The teacher concedes that she made a special point of telling Respondent not to strike Robert Pelligrino, but claims to have forgotten everything else about the discussion including the reason for this unusual warning. On or about February 3, 1984, while engaged in her duties as a teacher's aide, Respondent slapped the student Robert Pelligrino in the face. She struck the child with sufficient force to leave a mark which was visible for a brief period following the incident. Although Petitioner presented no evidence to establish that Respondent struck Robert Pelligrino, she readily admitted doing so. However, Respondent claims she was merely trying to correct his finger-sucking habit. This alibi is rejected, in that events leading up to the incident provoked Respondent and caused her to believe that Robert needed to be disciplined while his unacceptable behavior was fresh in his mind. Robert, who is mentally handicapped, tripped a smaller, handicapped student who fell and was injured as a result of Robert's action. Respondent first went to the aid of the injured student and immediately thereafter slapped Robert. The two other incidents were attested to by Robert's sister, Mrs. Donna Ferrell, who was serving as a volunteer aide on February 1, 1984. Mrs. Ferrell and Respondent were both working with a group of handicapped children on the occasion of a class field trip. Mrs. Ferrell observed Respondent beating on the chest of one student in an effort to re-attach a "stick-on" name tag which the child had removed. Later, on the bus, Mrs. Ferrell observed Respondent reach out and strike or tap a student on the top of his head to gain his attention. This evidence did not establish that Respondent injured either student, that she used undue force, or that she was attempting to punish either of them.
Recommendation From the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner enter a Final Order dismissing its charges against Respondent. R. T. CARPENTER Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 17th day of September, 1984.
Findings Of Fact Based on the Respondent's admissions in the Election of Rights form and on the exhibits and testimony received at the hearing, I make the following findings of fact: The Respondent holds Florida Teacher's Certificate No. 554716 covering the subject of Spanish, issued September 29, 1986, and valid through June 30, 1991. At all times material hereto, the Respondent taught in the Hillsborough County, Florida, school district at Middleton Junior High School. On or about March 23, 1981, the Respondent was arrested by the Lumberton, North Carolina, Police Department and charged with forgery. On or about June 6, 1984, the Respondent submitted an Application for a Teaching Position to the Hillsborough County (Florida) Public Schools in which she certified that she had never been arrested for a criminal offense. On or about June 28, 1984, June 27, 1985, and July 23, 1985, the Respondent submitted applications for teacher's certificates to the Department of Education of the State of Florida in which she certified that she neither had been convicted, nor had adjudication withheld, of a criminal offense. On or about December 10, 1986, the Respondent was arrested by the Tampa (Florida) Police Department and charged with grand theft and uttering a forged instrument. On or about May 28, 1987, the Respondent entered a plea of guilty before the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida, to one count of grand theft in violation of Section 812.014(2)(b), Florida Statutes, and 18 counts of uttering a forged instrument in violation of Section 831.02, Florida Statutes. Said court thereupon adjudicated the Respondent guilty of said felonies and sentenced her to six months community control and four and one-half years probation. On or about February 23, 1988, the Respondent was arrested by the University of South Florida Police Department, Tampa, Florida, and charged with four counts of uttering a forged instrument. In or about May, 1988, the Respondent was adjudicated guilty by the Circuit Court of having violated the terms of her probation in violation of Section 948.06, Florida Statutes, and she was sentenced to three years in prison.
Recommendation Based on all the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that the Education Practices Commission issue a Final Order finding the Respondent guilty of the violations described in the foregoing conclusions of law and permanently revoking the Respondent's Florida teaching certificate. DONE and ENTERED this 22nd day of March, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MICHAEL M. PARRISH Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of March, 1989. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 88-2993 The following are my specific rulings on all of the proposed findings submitted by all parties: Findings proposed by Petitioner Paragraphs 1 and 2: Accepted Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5: Rejected as not supported by clear and convincing evidence. (The evidence in support of these proposed findings does not even reach the level of competent substantial evidence.) Paragraphs 6, 7, and 8: Accepted. Paragraph 9: Rejected as not supported by clear and convincing evidence, and as contrary to the greater weight of the evidence. Paragraph 10: Rejected as irrelevant in view of the lack of proof regarding paragraph 9. Paragraphs 11 and 12: Accepted in substance, with some incorrect details modified. Paragraphs 13 and 14: Accepted. Paragraph 15: Accepted in substance with some unnecessary details omitted. Findings proposed by Respondent (None.) COPIES FURNISHED: Rosemary E. Armstrong and Catherine Peek McEwen 401 South Florida Avenue Post Office Box 3273 Tampa, Florida 33601-3273 Iris Locklear Zapata Florida Correctional Institution Post Office Box 147 Lowell, Florida 32663 Karen B. Wilde, Executive Director Education Practices Commission 418 Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Martin B. Schapp, Administrator Professional Practices Commission 319 West Madison Street, Room 3 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
The Issue The issues for consideration in this above-styled cause are as follows: Whether Respondent's actions of alleged misconduct are in violation of Section 231.28(1)(c), Florida Statutes, and constitute gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude. Whether the allegations of misconduct involving Respondent are in violation of Section 231.28(1)(f), Florida Statutes, thereby seriously reducing his effectiveness as an employee of the school board. Whether Respondent knowingly testified falsely while under oath, and if so, whether such conduct would be a violation of Section 231.28(1)(i), Florida Statutes, and the Principles of Professional Conduct for the education profession provided by the State Board of Education rules, by failing to maintain honesty in all professional dealings.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner, Tom Gallagher, as Commissioner of Education, is the state entity responsible for providing public, primary, secondary and adult education teaching certification in Marion County and throughout the State of Florida. Consistent with this responsibility, certified teachers are hired by each individual county for classroom direction and administrative activity. Respondent, Barrett W. Purvis, has been employed in the Marion County School system for five years. He holds Florida Educators Certificate 717483 covering the area of physical education. During the 1997-1998 school year, Respondent was employed as a basketball coach at Dunnellon High School located in Dunnellon, Florida. Ten years ago, in October 1990, Respondent, Barrett W. Purvis, was cited for driving under the influence of alcohol in Mississippi. He pled guilty to the offense and was fined $250.00. On or about June 10, 1994, Respondent was involved in an altercation wherein the daughter of the Sheriff of Dixie County was being harassed by a group of individuals. Respondent became involved in the altercation and acted in defense of both himself and the Sheriff's daughter. Respondent explained his involvement in the cause before the County Court at the time of his arraignment, and on June 30, 1994, the County Court dismissed the charge against him. On or about the evening of May 9, 1998, Respondent and his fiancée, along with other individuals attended a local dance club located in Ocala, Marion County, Florida. As a result of an argument between Respondent and his fiancée, Ocala Police were dispatched to the scene. According to various witnesses, Respondent had pushed or slapped his fiancée after being repeatedly punched by her. Pursuant to procedure, Respondent was arrested for Domestic Violence. While being placed in the patrol car, the taller Respondent's head came in contact with the shorter officer's head. There was conflicting testimony as to whether the collision was intentional, yet no injuries nor marks resulted on either man's head. Respondent was immediately pepper sprayed, knocked to the ground, and arrested for Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer. Respondent was taken to the Marion County Jail, where he was released the next day. Respondent was charged by the Office of the State Attorney with Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer, Domestic Violence Battery, and Resisting Arrest with Violence. Subsequently, the Office of the State Attorney reduced the charges to Resisting Arrest Without Violence, Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer and dismissed the charge of Domestic Violence Battery. Respondent was tried on March 18, 1999, and after a short jury deliberation, he was acquitted of all charges. During the course of Respondent's criminal trial which stemmed from the incident at the dance club, Respondent testified that he did not receive medical treatment at the scene but had to treat himself at the County Jail. The evidence introduced at the Criminal Trial is unclear as to the extent, if any, that the Respondent received medical treatment. It is clear, however, that the Respondent believed that he had not received medical attention and was not attempting to be dishonest or mislead the jury. During the course of Respondent's criminal trial stemming from that same incident, Respondent unintentionally misrepresented his prior criminal record to the jury. In fact, he had been previously arrested. In addition to the fact that the misrepresentation was an insignificant reference and not in response to a question elicited by counsel for Respondent or the prosecutor, the Respondent was unaware that the Driving Under the Influence charge he received ten years ago was a criminal charge, but believed it was a traffic charge. Moreover, since the 1994 Criminal Mischief charge was dismissed, his benign representation of a lack of a prior arrest record to the jury was intended to be truthful and not misleading. Respondent has received satisfactory evaluations throughout his career in Marion County, and has no record of disciplinary problems throughout his employment. There is insufficient evidence in the record to support a factual finding that Respondent committed an act of gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude. There is insufficient evidence in the record to support a factual finding that Respondent committed an act which seriously reduces his effectiveness as an employee of the School Board. There is insufficient evidence in the record to support a factual finding that Respondent violated the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession provided by the State Board of Education Rules, in failing to maintain honesty in all professional dealings.
Recommendation It is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Department of Education, Education Practices Commission enter its final order that the counts and allegations of misconduct as set forth in the Amended Administrative Complaint be dismissed, and his teaching certificate be reinstated to current good standing. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of December, 2000, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. WILLIAM R. PFEIFFER Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of December, 2000. COPIES FURNISHED: Steven G. Burton, Esquire Robert E. Sickles, Esquire Broad & Cassel 100 North Tampa Street, Suite 3500 Post Office Box 3310 Tampa, Florida 33602-3310 Philip R. Pignataro 11419 Stoneybrook Path Port Richey, Florida 34668 Kathleen M. Richards, Executive Director Department of Education, Education Practices Commission Florida Education Center 325 West Gaines Street, Room 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Mark D. Shelnutt, Esquire 421 South Pine Avenue Ocala, Florida 34474-4175 Michael H. Olenick, General Counsel Department of Education The Capitol, Suite 1701 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Jerry W. Whitmore, Chief Bureau of Educator Standards Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street, Suite 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Findings Of Fact The Respondent holds Florida teaching certificate 227677, covering the areas of Chemistry, Biology, and Middle Grades General Science, which is valid through June 30, 1996. Petitioner has been certified to teach in Florida since 1969. On or about February 5, 1979, Respondent was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct, a misdemeanor, in Orange County, Florida. Respondent pled not guilty to the charge, waived a jury trial and was tried before the court and found guilty. The count withheld adjudication and on or about May 2, 1979, the Court sentenced Respondent to pay a $350.00 fine, plus court costs. On or about June 24, 1985, Respondent executed, under oath, an Application for Extension of Certificate. Respondent answered "no" to the following question: Have you ever been convicted or had adjudication withheld in a criminal offense other than a minor traffic violation or are there any criminal charges now pending against you other than minor traffic violations? Respondent was negligent in completing his application in that he failed to acknowledge his 1979 arrest for Disorderly Conduct for which the Court withheld adjudication. The renewal application was completed six years after the incident and Respondent simply forgot to list it on the form. On or about December 25, 1992, Respondent was arrested and charged with Battery, a first degree misdemeanor, following a domestic disturbance with his wife in Seminole County, Florida. Respondent pled nolo contendere to the battery charge. On or about February 11, 1993, the count withheld adjudication and sentenced Respondent to serve six months probation. Probation was successfully terminated on August 23, 1993. On or about September 6, 1993, Respondent was arrested and charged with Aggravated Battery, a third degree felony, and Shooting Into or At a Building, a second degree felony. Respondent pled not guilty to the charges and was tried and convicted on both counts following a trial by jury. On or about May 30, 1994, the Court adjudicated the Respondent guilty of Aggravated Battery and withheld adjudication on the charge of Shooting Into or At a Building. Respondent was sentenced to 3 years in prison on the battery charge (Count I). He was placed on one year probation on Count II and required to pay court costs. The conviction and sentence was appealed to the Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida. The court upheld the conviction and sentence. However, it did certify a question as one of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court Respondent testified that he has been a school teacher for more than 25 years and has an outstanding record in the community.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Respondent be found guilty of violating Sections 231.28(1)(c), (e), (f), (i), (j), Florida Statutes and not guilty of violating Section 231.28(1)(a), Florida Statutes and Fla. Admin. Code R. 6B-1.006(5)(a) and (h). It is further RECOMMENDED that the Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for a period of 5 years, followed by a period of 3 years probation should the Respondent become recertified in Florida and upon such reasonable and necessary conditions as the Commission may require. DONE AND ENTERED this 22nd day of December, 1995, in Tallahassee, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE, 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 22nd day of December, 1995. APPENDIX Petitioner's Proposed findings of fact: Accepted in substance: paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4 (in part), 5 (in part), 6 (in part. Rejected as hearsay and irrelevant: paragraphs 4 (in part), 5 (in part), 6 (in part). Respondent did not file proposed findings of fact. COPIES FURNISHED: John A. Knight, Pro Se 1817 Harding Avenue Sanford, Florida 32771 Barbara J. Staros, General Counsel Department of Education Suite 1701, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Ronald G. Stowers, Esquire Office of the General Counsel Department of Education Suite 1701, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Dr. Karen Barr Wilde, Executive Director Education Practices Commission 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Kathleen Richards, Administrator Professional Practices Services 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
The Issue Whether Petitioner's application for certification should be denied for the reasons set forth in the Notice of Reasons.
Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence adduced at hearing, and the record as a whole, the following findings of fact are made: Petitioner is an applicant for a Florida Educator's Certificate. On April 17, 2004, at the Kendall campus of Miami-Dade Community College (College), Petitioner sat for the general knowledge portion of the certification examination (Test), which included an essay question. In advance of the Test, Petitioner was informed in writing of, among other things, the following: In its continuing effort to assure fairness and equity in examination administration conditions, the Florida Department of Education is putting into written form those activities that have been, and continue to be, regarded as cheating by, or on behalf of, an examinee. The specific items represent cheating activities encountered throughout the history of the Department's assessment programs, but do not preclude the Department from appropriate action in cases of cheating that do not fall under a specific item. These guidelines are applicable to the Florida Teacher Certification Examinations program . . . . Section 1 defines those behaviors that constitute cheating. Section 2 lists materials, equipment and other aids that examinees are prohibited from using during the examination. . . . Section 1: Cheating Cheating is any unauthorized activity that impairs or alters the circumstances of the examination as a measure of the knowledge or skills it was designed to assess, including but not limited to the following: * * * c. Bringing, or attempting to bring, into the examination room, materials, equipment, or information in any tangible form that could be used to provide unauthorized assistance in responding to examination questions or directions. * * * f. During the examination, using or attempting to use, prohibited aids, as identified in Section 2. * * * Section 2: Prohibited Aids The following aids are prohibited during examination administration: . . . papers of any kind, including scratch paper; . . . * * * Annette Lorenzo, a College employee, was the "room supervisor" in the room in which Petitioner took the Test. Ms. Lorenzo was assisted by another College employee, Gladys Manrique, "who was "working as a proctor" in the room. When Petitioner arrived in the room the morning of the Test, she was checked in by Ms. Lorenzo, who assigned her a seat near the front of the room. Upon being told of her seat assignment, Petitioner "pointed to the last seat of the last row" and asked if she could sit there instead. Ms. Lorenzo "said, 'Okay, no problem,' and [Petitioner] went and sat down in that seat." After "checking everybody in," Ms. Lorenzo read "instructions for the exam" to the examinees (including "go[ing] through all the guidelines on what constitute[d] cheating, as well as what [was] and [was] not allowed in the room"), and, with Ms. Manrique's help, handed out the testing materials. Testing then began (at approximately 8:45 a.m.). Ms. Lorenzo and Ms. Manrique "walk[ed] around the room, up and down the aisles," to "mak[e] sure that nobody [was] cheating or using anything [prohibited]" while the test was being administered. As she was doing so, during the essay portion of the Test, Ms. Lorenzo noticed Petitioner periodically "looking into her [cupped] left hand [which was positioned on the desk in front of her, just above her answer booklet, and appeared to contain tissues] while she was writing" in the booklet with her right hand. Ms. Lorenzo observed Petitioner's engaging in this suspicious conduct for "[a]t least ten minutes." During this time, Ms. Lorenzo was "staring at [Petitioner], watching her very closely." When she eventually made eye contact with Ms. Lorenzo, Petitioner moved her hands towards her face and "made a noise like she was blowing her noise." She then closed her left hand into a fist and continued writing with her right hand. Ms. Lorenzo advised Ms. Manrique that she suspected that "something [was] going on" with Petitioner, and she asked Ms. Manrique to "take a look." Ms. Manrique observed Petitioner for approximately five minutes, after which she reported back to Ms. Lorenzo that she "believe[d] there [was] something going on as well." Ms. Lorenzo then "walked to the back of the room and stood to the right of Petitioner." From her vantage point, Ms. Lorenzo noticed "sticking out the bottom of [Petitioner's left] hand," which was "still in a fist," not only tissues, but "paper with some writing on it." Upon making this observation, Ms. Lorenzo asked Petitioner to show her "everything [Petitioner] had in her hand."3 Petitioner's immediate response was to "[u]s[e] her right hand [to] grab[] the tissues out of her left hand," which she then quickly closed into a fist again. She gave the tissues she had transferred from her left to right hand to Ms. Lorenzo, explaining that she had "just tissues" and nothing else. Ms. Lorenzo, however, knew otherwise and demanded that Petitioner open her left hand. Petitioner complied, revealing the paper that Ms. Lorenzo had seen "sticking out" of the hand when it was clenched. The paper was the size of a "small note [pad] sheet." It was crumpled from being held tightly by Petitioner. On the paper was a complete essay that that Petitioner had written before entering the examination room. The essay was entitled, "A Place to Visit: San Antonio Park."4 Ms. Lorenzo took the paper, as well as Petitioner's testing materials, including Petitioner's answer booklet, from Petitioner. In her answer booklet, Petitioner had written an essay about San Antonio Park, substantial portions of which were identical, word for word, to what was on the paper that Ms. Lorenzo had confiscated from Petitioner's left hand. Petitioner had knowingly brought this paper into the examination room with the intent to use it as an aid in answering the essay question on the general knowledge portion of the Test,5 and she carried out this intent once the Test began.6 As Petitioner started to "g[e]t a little bit loud," Ms. Lorenzo escorted her from the room and took her to see Juan Meza, the College's testing director.7 On the way to Mr. Meza's office, Petitioner insisted that she had not cheated and "begg[ed] [Ms. Lorenzo] to let her go finish the exam." Ms. Lorenzo responded that Petitioner's "test [was] over for today." After Ms. Lorenzo had told Mr. Meza that she had "found [Petitioner] cheating," Mr. Meza spoke to Petitioner and told her that she could not "continue taking the test" because she had been caught cheating. Petitioner denied to Mr. Meza that she had been cheating. Mr. Meza, in turn, informed Petitioner that he would send an "irregularity report" to the Department and that the Department would "make [a] decision" as to whether she had been cheating and then "contact her to let her know what [was] going on." As promised, on or about April 19, 2004, Mr. Meza sent an "irregularity report" to the Department (along with the materials that Ms. Lorenzo had taken from Petitioner in the examination room). On April 26, 2004, the Department sent the following letter to Petitioner: This letter is in response to information I have received from staff at Miami Dade College, Kendall campus confirming that you failed to follow testing procedures during the administration of the General Knowledge Test on April 17, 2004. Along with the admission ticket you received for the examination, you received a letter that outlines the State's policy on cheating. Section 1 (c) and (f) and Section 2 state the following: "Section 1: Cheating Cheating is any unauthorized activity that impairs or alters the circumstances of the examination as a measure of the knowledge or skills it was designed to assess, including but not limited to the following: c. Bringing, or attempting to bring, into the examination room, materials, equipment, or information in any tangible form that could be used to provide unauthorized assistance in responding to examination questions or directions. * * * f. During the examination, using or attempting to use, prohibited aids, as identified in Section 2. Section 2: Prohibited Aids The following aids are prohibited during examination administration: Timex Data Link™ wrist watch; electronic pager; cellular telephone; pocket organizer; electronic writing pen or pen-input device; any electronic device with an alphabetic keyboard; dictionary or other books; ruler; papers of any kind, including scratch paper; slide rule; protractor; compass; laptop computer; calculator watch, or calculator except those calculators provided at the test center for the following tests: Mathematics 6-12, the math portion of Middle Grades Integrated Curriculum (MGIC), Middle Grades Mathematics 5-9, Chemistry 6-12, Physics 6-12, and the math subtests of the General Knowledge Test." As a result of your failure to abide by this policy, the score on the Essay subtest of the General Knowledge Test under your name and Social Security number . . . for the April 17, 2004, test administration has been invalidated. By copy of this letter, I am also informing Professional Practices Services and the Bureau of Educator Certification of this decision. This decision means that you have yet to fulfill the State's requirements for a passing score on the Essay subtest of the General Knowledge Test. You are entitled to dispute this decision through legal administrative procedures. If you wish to do so, you must send a written request for an administrative hearing in accordance with the provisions of Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. The written request must be postmarked within twenty (20) calendar days of the date you receive this letter and submitted to the following address: . . . . If you fail to submit the written request within the specified time period, you will have waived the opportunity to contest the decision through administrative proceedings, and the score invalidation decision will be final, subject only to judicial review pursuant to Section 120.68, Florida Statutes. Petitioner responded by sending a letter to the Department, which read (verbatim) as follows: I have received your letter about the problem I had the day of test. I'm so sorry about the day. In 20 years of being a teacher, I never had that kind of problem. That day I had a bad cold and when I finished my test, the only thing that I had to do was to check it, but I was coughing badly and I took a napkin that was inside my bag on the floor, but together with the napkin came out a paper. I took both in my hand. I put my hand up, because I knew that if the teacher saw me in this moment I got in trouble, but it was too late. The teacher came to me, asked for the paper and the napkin and without I could explain anything. She took to the supervisor and explained everything to him. He told he had to follow the rules, then he had to report the incident. So I think I should have an opportunity to do my tests again. The Commissioner subsequently notified Petitioner that her application for certification was being denied because she had "attempted to cheat" on the essay portion of Test "by referring to a complete essay she had in her possession when she entered the room." This denial of Petitioner's application for certification is the subject of the instant proceeding.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Education Practices Commission enter a final order sustaining the denial of Petitioner's application for certification. DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of August, 2005, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S STUART M. LERNER Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 30th day of August, 2005.
The Issue Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint? If so, what disciplinary action should be taken against her?
Findings Of Fact Based upon the evidence adduced at hearing, and the record as a whole, the following Findings of Fact are made: Since April 19, 1991, Respondent has held Florida teaching certificate 637552, which covers the areas of business education (grades 6 through 12) and physical education (grades 6 through 12). The certificate is valid through June 30, 1996. Respondent is now, and has been at all times material to the instant case, including January 4, 1992, employed as a teacher by the Broward County School Board. On January 4, 1992, while operating her motor vehicle, Respondent was involved in an incident which led to her arrest and to the filing of an information against her in Broward County Circuit Court Case No. 92-2200CF10A. The information contained the following allegations, all of which were true: MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that [P]AULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January, A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, did unlawfully commit an assault upon Lieutenant Tom McKane, a duly qualified and legally authorized officer of the City of Sunrise, knowing at the time that he was a law enforcement officer, with a deadly weapon, to wit: an automobile, while he was in the lawful performance of his duties, without intent to kill, by striking the police car being drive[n] by Lieutenant Tom McKane with [s]aid automobile thereby placing Lieutenant Tom McKane in fear of imminent violence, contrary to F.S. 784.021 and 784.07(2)(c), COUNT II AND MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that PAULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, did unlawfully commit an assault upon Lieutenant John George, a duly qualified and legally authorized officer of the Town of Davie, knowing at the time that he was a law enforcement officer, with a deadly weapon, to wit: an automobile, while he was in the lawful performance of his duties, without intent to kill, by driving said automobile toward the police car being driven by Lieutenant John George thereby placing John George in fear of imminent violence, contrary to F.S. 784.021 and 784.07(2)(c), COUNT III AND MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that PAULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, did unlawfully commit an assault upon Sergeant Gary Silvestri, a duly qualified and legally authorized officer of the Town of Davie, knowing at the time that he was a law enforcement officer, with a deadly weapon, to wit: an automobile, while he was in the lawful performance of his duties, without intent to kill, by driving said automobile toward the police car being driven by Sergeant Gary Silvestri thereby placing Sergeant Gary Silvestri in fear of imminent violence, contrary to F.S. 784.021 and 784.07(2)(c), COUNT IV AND MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that PAULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, did then and there unlawfully, willfully and maliciously injure the property of another, to wit: a police car, property of City of Sunrise, by striking said police car with another automobile, the damage to the said property so injured being greater than two hundred dollars ($200.00) but less than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), contrary to F.S. 806.13(1) and F.S. 806.13(2), COUNT V AND MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that PAULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, while being the operator of a motor vehicle upon a street or highway, and having knowledge that she had been directed to stop the said motor vehicle by a duly authorized police officer, did unlawfully and willfully refuse or fail to stop in compliance with the said directive, contrary to F.S. 316.1935, COUNT VI AND MICHAEL J. SATZ, State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, as Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Florida in the County of Broward, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney charges that PAULA DAWN REDO on the 4th day of January A.D. 1992, in the County and State aforesaid, did then and there operate a motor vehicle in willful and wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property in that said Defendant did drive at a high rate of speed disregarding a number of traffic control devices, contrary to F.S. 316.192. The incident was the subject of newspaper article published in the Metro Section of the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel on January 9, 1992. Because of the publicity surrounding the incident, Respondent was asked to transfer from the school at which she had been teaching before the incident (Western High School) to another school (Pines Middle School). Respondent agreed to the transfer, which was thereafter effectuated. She has remained on the instructional staff at Pines Middle School since the transfer. On August 8, 1994, after having discussed the matter with her attorney, Respondent entered a guilty plea to each of the counts of the information that had been filed against her in Broward County Circuit Court Case No. 92- 2200CF10A. Court records reflect that the plea was entered in Respondent's "best interest." 1/ Respondent was adjudicated guilty of the crimes alleged in Counts IV through VI of the information and sentenced to time served (three days in jail) for having committed these crimes. With respect to the crimes alleged in Counts I through III of the information, adjudication of guilt was withheld and Respondent was placed on two years probation. To date, Respondent has conducted herself in accordance with the terms and condition of her probation.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Commission enter a final order finding Respondent guilty of the violations of subsection (1) of Section 231.28, Florida Statutes, alleged in the Administrative Complaint and disciplining her for having committed these violations by suspending her teaching certificate for a period of 60 days and placing her on probation, subject to such terms and conditions as the Commission may deem appropriate, for a period of one year following the end of the suspension. DONE AND ENTERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 11th day of December, 1995. 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 11th day of December, 1995.
The Issue Whether Respondent committed offenses, as set forth in the Administrative Complaint, sufficient to justify the imposition of discipline with regard to Respondent's Florida educator's certificate, and if so, what penalties should be imposed?
Findings Of Fact Respondent holds Florida Education Certificate No. 720360, covering the area of business education, and was employed in the Santa Rosa County School system during the 2000-2001 school term as a business education teacher at Milton High School. Student S.B. was born April 19, 1983, and attended Milton High School for four years. During that time, she knew Respondent as a teacher and coach at the school. As a senior during the Fall of 2001-2002 school year, S.B. and her friend, J.N., another female student, called Respondent on the telephone as a joke. They told him they were coming to see him at his house. He said okay. That night, as the two female students left Respondent's home after staying about an hour, Respondent kissed S.B. on the mouth. Later, Respondent called S.B. at her home or placed calls to her cellular telephone on several occasions. S.B. also called Respondent. Sometimes, these telephone calls lasted for an hour or more. During the 2000-2001 school year, S.B. visited Respondent at his home on at least four and possible as much as six different occasions. Each visit occurred in the evening at Respondent's home when S.B. and Respondent were the only persons present. Respondent was a 33-year-old teacher and S.B., a 17-year-old student. Respondent and S.B. kissed and embraced each other on each of the visits by S.B. to Respondent's home. On the last visit, Respondent removed S.B.'s shirt, fondled her breasts through her bra and touched her vaginal area through her clothing. Respondent laid on top of S.B. and pressed his penis against her vagina through their clothing. Respondent professed his love for S.B. and talked to her about a future together following her graduation from high school. Respondent and S.B.'s relationship became the subject of rumors at Milton High School in March of 2001. Approximately three teachers had conversations with the Milton High School assistant principal that something was going on between S.B. and Respondent. The assistant principal confronted Respondent on March 16, 2001. Respondent denied any involvement with the two female students, S.B. and J.N., beyond two visits with them at his home where, he claimed, nothing happened between him and S.B. The assistant principal spoke with S.B. on March 16, 2001, and again confronted Respondent. This time, Respondent confessed to the relationship. He admitted to three or four occasions when he had kissed S.B. in the course of her visits to his house and that he had rubbed her breasts over her shirt. Respondent's improper conduct with S.B. became common knowledge among faculty, parents, and students at Milton High School. As a result of his admitted misconduct with S.B., the Santa Rosa County School District suspended Respondent on April 12, 2001, and that suspension continues in effect pending the outcome of this proceeding. Respondent's actions with regard to S.B. is immoral. A 33-year-old male teacher kissing, fondling, and hugging a 17-year-old student is an act of moral turpitude. Respondent's involvement with S.B. and the resulting publicity have seriously reduced Respondent's effectiveness as a teacher. Respondent's conduct and actions with S.B. exposed the student to conditions which were, or could have been, harmful to her mental and physical health. Respondent's actions knowingly and intentionally exposed S.B. to unnecessary embarrassment and disparagement. Respondent exploited his relationship with S.B. for personal gain. Respondent carried on a romantic relationship with a 17-year-old girl in order to satisfy his own romantic and sexual desires.
Recommendation Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered finding Respondent guilty of the offenses set forth in the Administrative Complaint and revoking Respondent's Florida Educator Certificate No. 720360. DONE AND ENTERED this 5th day of September, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DON W. DAVIS Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 5th day of September, 2002. COPIES FURNISHED: J. David Holder, Esquire 24357 U.S. Highway 331, South Santa Rosa Beach, Florida 32459 Kathleen M. Richards, Executive Director Education Practices Commission Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street, Room 224E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 R. John Westberry, Esquire Holt & Westberry 1108-A North 12th Avenue Pensacola, Florida 32501 Jerry W. Whitmore, Chief Bureau of Educator Standards Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street, Suite 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
