Findings Of Fact Based on my obersvation of the witnesses and their demeanor while testifying, the arguments of counsel, and the briefs which were filed post- hearing, the following relevant facts are found. Ernest B. Brown is the holder of Post-Graduate Rank II Florida Teaching Certificate No. 167290, covering administration and supervision, elementary education and junior college which by its term is valid until June 30, 1985. Ernest Brown, Respondent, has been employed in the public schools of Pinellas County as fifth grade teacher at Gulf Beaches Elementary School since August, 1975, and was on continuing contract during the 1976-77 school year. He resigned effective May 31, 1977 after inquiries were raised concerning his personal conduct with a female fifth grade student (Michelle Stewart). Thereafter the Department of Education received a report from the Pinellas County School officials on or about June 1, 1977 indicating that Respondent had been charged with lewd and lascivious acts in the presence of a female child under the age of 14 and handling and fondling a female child under the age of 14 years. Pursuant thereto and following an inquiry by the staff of the Professional Practices Council, on July 18, 1977, said Council issued a report to the Executive Committee of the Professional Practices Council whereupon the Executive Committee recommended that the Commissioner of Education find that probable cause exist to believe that Respondent is guilty of acts which provide grounds for the revocation of his Florida teaching certificate. By letter dated July 27, 1977, the Commissioner found probable cause and directed the filing of the instant petition herein. Michelle Stewart, eleven years old and presently a fifth grade student at Gulf Beaches Elementary School, was a student of Respondent while she completed here third grade instruction. Ms. Stewart was approximately three weeks late reporting for classes during her third grade school year. After being in school for approximately two weeks, she sought assistance from Respondent regarding problems she was having with her math. At that time, there were approximately three or four other students also seeking assistance from the Respondent. Respondent asked Michelle to sit in a chair behind his desk where she waited until the other students had received their assistance. According to Ms. Stewart, Respondent asked to touch her pants in the crotch section. Ms. Steward was shocked but did not protest when the Respondent touched her in the seat of her pants for approximately one minute. On another occasion, Respondent was invited to attend a birthday party given at Michelle's house by her. Respondent was reluctant to attend inasmuch as he did not have a gift to give her. He reluctantly agreed to attend based on the enticement of Ms. Stewart, her mother, and several other students who attended the party. When persuaded to attend the party, Respondent agreed only to come if Ms. Stewarts mother permitted him to take Ms. Stewart shopping for some clothing within the next few days. As best as can be determined from the record, it appears that the birthday party was during the early part of May, 1977. Within a few days, Respondent arranged to take Ms. Stewart shopping by obtaining permission from her mother. However, as the facts were later brought out, it appears that Respondent obtained permission from Ms. Stewart's mother by telling her that he wanted Ms. Stewart to assist him in arranging some books on his book shelves, and Ms. Stewarts mother agreed with the condition that Ms. Stewart be brought back home before six oclock. Ms. Stewart testified that she was picked up by Respondent and taken to his home where they were alone. Immediately after entering Respondents house, he asked here if she was hungry and whether or not she would like to fix herself a sandwich and watched TV for a few minutes. Thereafter Respondent took some pictures of here with his Polaroid camera. Respondent later offered her some clothing and brought them out telling her that she could try the dresses on in his presence. Ms. Stewart undressed in Respondent's presence and when she finished trying on her dresses that he had purchased, Respondent went to the bathroom and undressed, entering his living room area with only his shirt on. During this time Ms. Stewart was undressed and Respondent asked her to lie down on the floor where he had placed a towel and had relocated an electric fan positioned so that it would blow down on them. She testified that he laid on top of her for approximately ten minutes stroking and kissing her. After this incident was over (approximately ten minutes) Respondent pleaded with Ms. Stewart to refrain from telling anyone about the incident to which she agreed. However she testified that she did tell some of her friends about the incident. Ms. Stewart testified that during the next school year she opted to be in another teacher's classroom and Respondent rebelled by talking to her and here mother in an attempt to get her to change her mind. She refused to do so because she wanted to be in the class with a neighbor and her boyfriend. During the school year Ms. Stewart recalled that she and approximately two other students were taken to several extracurricular activities by Respondent after school hours, including the circus, lipizian stallions, and Holiday on Ice. Detective William Creekbaum presently employed as a real estate salesman, was formerly employed as a detective with the St. Petersburg Police Department was assigned to investigate complaints regarding incidents that the Respondent had allegedly been engaged with several minor students including Michelle Stewart. Detective Creekbaum was assigned to investigate the case on or about May 19, 1977 at which time, and during the course of his investigation, he interviewed approximately ten minor female students. On May 31, 1977, he decided that he should contact the Respondent and make certain inquiries of him, which he did at the school. He visited the school and asked the Respondent to come with him down to the police station for some questions. The Respondent drove his car down to police headquarters and a statement was given to Detective Creekbaum. Prior therto, Respondnent was apprised of his rights per Miranda. Detective Creekbaum explained to Respondent the necessity of his being truthful during his investigation, although he stressed the fact that he made no promises that the matter would be handled internally". He testified, and the statements bear out the fact that the Respondent was, in fact, advised that the investigation was criminal in nature. Initially, during the interview, Respondent denied the material allegations of the charges that he had fondled Michelle Stewart, however, upon repeated questioning by Detective Creekbaum, Respondent admitted that he had fondled Michelle Steward as charged. Although Respondent's position on this admission is that he only told Detective Creekbaum that he had fondled Michelle Stewart because he "thought that was what he wanted to hear and further he was led to believe that nothing would come of it". After the admissions by Respondent, Detective Creekbaum advised Respondent that he was under arrest where he was taken to the booking section of the police department. Immediately thereafter, Douglas McBriarty, an employee of the personnel department for the Pinellas County school system and charged with resolving teacher problems, visited Respondent at the jail where Respondent also admitted to the charge of fondling Michelle Stewart. Dr. McBriarty advised Respondent that it would be the Board's recommendation to immediately suspend him pending a decision on the merits and further action by the board to seek revocation of his (Respondent's) teaching certificate by the Professional Practices Council. Respondent asked if he had any options whereupon Dr. McBriarty told him that he could resign. At that point, the Respondent resigned effective May 31, 1977. The Respondent took the stand and testified that he was misled by Detective Creekbaum into thinking that nothing would come of the incident and that while he denied initially fondling Ms. Stewart, he only changed his story to an admission because he was of the opinion that that was what Detective Creekbaum wanted. He also testified that he was of the opinion that nothing would come of the incident as related by Detective Creekbaum. 1/ Without question, the Respondent enjoys a good reputation in the community and by his fellow peers at the school. He is regarded as a very good instructor who goes over and above his call of duty with respect to his classroom duties. Witnesses Nancy H. Akins and Catherine Smith, both instuctors in the Pinellas County school system, testified of their familiarity with the Respondents professional life and both gave him high marks. As stated, the Respondent denied the material allegations of the charging allegations in this case. Presently he is project director for the Tampa sickle cell disease project. In addition to denying the allegations of the complaint herein he testified that he was "set up" by Detective Creekbaum. He voiced his opinion that he felt that if he were cooperative and stated what Detective Creekbaum wanted him to say that he would go free. The undersigned has examined the record to see whether or not any misrepresentations or other statements were made to prompt Respondent to admit to the fondling of Michelle Stewart and the record is barren in this regard. Based thereon, I shall recommend that the allegations contained in the petition filed herein be sustained.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the teaching certificate of Respondent, Ernest B. Brown, be suspended for a period of two years. ENTERED this 20th day of September, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. JAMES E. BRADWELL, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Mail: 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675
The Issue Whether Respondent, a school teacher, committed the offenses set forth in the Administrative Complaint
Findings Of Fact Respondent currently holds Florida teaching certificate 716424, covering the area of Economics. This teaching certificate is valid through June 30, 1995 (sic). During the 1993-1994 school year, Respondent was employed as a teacher at Ft. Pierce Westwood High School, in St. Lucie County School District. On or about December 15, 1993, Respondent showed an "R" rated video, Posse, to her students. The video contained profanity, nudity and scenes depicting sexual acts. On or about January 6, 1994, Respondent was issued a Letter of Reprimand and was suspended for one (1) day without pay effective June 9, 1994, for demonstrating poor judgment and violating school procedures in showing the video.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner enter a final order that adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained herein. It is FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Respondent be issued a written reprimand for violating Rule 6B-1.006(3)(a), Florida Administrative Code, and Section 231.28(1)(i), Florida Statutes. DONE AND ENTERED this 15th day of May, 1996 in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON, 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 15th day of May, 1996. COPIES FURNISHED: Carl J. Zahner, II, Esquire Ronald G. Stowers, Esquire Department of Education Suite 1701, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Monique Carter 1901 Valencia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 Sam Carter 1901 Valencia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 Karen Barr Wilde, Executive Director Education Practices Commission 301 Florida Education Center 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Kathleen P. Richards, Administrator Professional Practices Services 352 Florida Education Center 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
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.
The Issue The substantive issue in this proceeding is whether the Respondents Florida teaching certificate should be suspended or revoked based upon the allegations of Petitioner's complaint dated June 4, 1987. Respondent has raised various procedural issues in his written documents and in a telephone motion hearing held on November 10, 1987. Those issues include whether he has already surrendered his teaching certificate, whether the investigation was proper and whether the formal hearing was properly scheduled.
Findings Of Fact Based upon a consideration of all evidence properly made part of the record in this proceeding, the following findings are made: David Cunningham is now, and was at all times relevant, certified as an elementary school teacher under State of Florida Certificate No. 468382. The certified copy received in evidence as Petitioner's Exhibit 1 reveals a date of issue of April 14, 1986 and an expiration date of June 30, 1990. No competent evidence was presented to support Respondent's allegation that the certificate was invalid or otherwise lawfully relinquished or revoked. David Cunningham was employed as an elementary teacher at Caley Elementary School in Orlando, Florida during school year 1983-84, until March 1984, when he was placed on leave without pay for the remainder of the school year. Dynell Harrell was a fifth grade student in Cunningham's reading class during the first semester of 1983-84 at Caley. Dynell was twelve years old at the time. During the second semester of 1983-84, Dynell transferred to another school, but began having contacts with Cunningham outside of the school setting. The two went to amusement parks and to restaurants. On only one occasion they were accompanied by Dynell's siblings. Dynell began spending weekends at Cunningham's house. Cunningham gave him presents of clothes, shoes, and money - - $20 or $30 at a time, for an eventual total of at least $500. On the occasion of the second weekend visit, Cunningham got in bed with Dynell. Later, during the night, he began touching and rubbing the youth and took his clothes off. In response to Dynell's question of what was going on, Cunningham responded with a reminder of their friendship and all the things he had done to benefit him. They engaged in oral sex at that time. After that, the sexual contact was routine on the weekend visits, once or twice a month. Cunningham engaged Dynell in oral and anal sex and gave him vodka and cigarettes. Dynell was afraid to tell anyone as he thought he would lose his friend. He also felt he owed Cunningham a favor. During this time, Dynell's mother noticed a withdrawal of her son from his close relationship with her. She was somewhat suspicious of Cunningham's interest but Dynell denied that Cunningham had ever asked him to do anything that he didn't want to do. She believed him because she felt he would be candid with her. At the beginning of the seventh grade, Dynell went to Illinois to live with his grandmother in Illinois. Cunningham called him on the phone, but his grandmother was suspicious and didn't let Dynell talk. On one occasion, Cunningham stopped at the grandmother's house on his way to North Dakota. The grandmother let Cunningham take Dynell out to eat, but only in the company of Dynell's cousin. Dynell also wanted his cousin to come along as he figured nothing could happen if they were not alone. Cunningham told Dynell he wanted to continue seeing him, but Dynell did not want that and responded that he would be in Chicago and would not be able to see Cunningham. Dynell has had no further contact with Cunningham, even after the youth's return to Florida in eighth grade. Dynell has received mental health counseling to help him deal with the relationship with Cunningham. Dynell has been reluctant to associate along with male students and adult males, and refused to participate in his church's Big Brother program unless one of his friends is able to accompany him. John Hawco, administrator of Employee Relations for the Orange County School Board, would not recommend that Cunningham ever be employed in any position in which he would be exposed to children. His effectiveness as a teacher has been seriously impaired by his conduct toward his former student. He exploited his professional relationship with that student in return for personal gain and advantage. By certified letters and through contacts with Cunningham's prior attorney Jerry Whitmore, consultant for the State Department of Education, provided notices to Cunningham regarding the complaint and investigation. Cunningham sent his original teaching certificate to the investigator, stating that he should not be investigated as his certificate was no longer valid. The investigation continued, again with notice to Cunningham. He declined to participate in an informal conference and refused to indicate on the Election of Rights form provided to him which option he chose in response to the complaint: voluntary surrender for permanent revocation, admission of allegations and request for informal hearing, or dispute of allegations and request for a formal hearing by the Division of Administrative Hearings. Instead, he appended a separate statement to the form disputing the allegations and arguing that he was not a valid certificate holder as his certificate was based on a correspondence course.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that David Martin Cunningham's Florida teaching certificate be permanently revoked. DONE AND ORDERED this 26th day of January, 1988, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MARY CLARK 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 26th day of January, 1988. COPIES FURNISHED: J. David Holder, Esquire RIGS BY & HOLDER 325 John Knox Road Building C, Suite 135 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Mr. David Cunningham 8775 20th Street, #921 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Karen Barr Wilde Executive Director Education Practices Commission Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Martin B. Schapp Administrator Professional Practices Services 319 West Madison Street Room 3 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
The Issue Whether or not Respondent engaged in conduct involving gross immorality and/or moral turpitude which seriously reduced her effectiveness as an instructional employee as alleged, in violation of Subsections 231.28(1)(c) and (f), Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact Respondent holds Florida teaching certificate number 584942, issued by the Department of Education, State of Florida, covering the area of substitute teacher, elementary and secondary levels. Said certificate is valid through June 30, 1990. At all times material hereto, Respondent Debra Alcorn-Howerter, was listed as a substitute teacher in the Polk County School District. On July 20, 1988, Respondent entered MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, and went into the Noncommissioned Officers Club (NCO), which is a lounge/bar that serves alcoholic beverages. Upon her arrival at the NCO club, Respondent was in the company of her minor daughter, G.H., who was, at the time, approximately nine years of age. Respondent was advised by the NCO Club's night manager, Edmond Bates, that it was against military policy to have a minor in an area where alcoholic beverages were served. Bates allowed Respondent to take G.H. into an area adjacent to the bar that was closed at the time. Respondent moved in that area with G.H. for the remainder of the evening. Respondent was allowed to purchase approximately two or three alcoholic beverages over the course of the evening while at the club although she could not carry G.H. into areas where alcoholic beverages were being served. While in the club, Respondent was joined by an airman who remained with her until she left the club. They engaged in affectionate conduct in front of G.H. including hugging and kissing. Over the course of the evening, Bates observed Respondent acting emotionally upset, crying and the couple argued in G.H.'s presence. The NCO Club closed at 11:00 p.m. and Bates had to ask Respondent and G.H. to leave the club when she did not leave with the other patrons. Respondent still did not leave and at approximately 11:15 p.m., Bates again ordered Respondent to leave and she started crying. Respondent was escorted outside the club whereupon she started crying and fell to the floor. Respondent had to be picked up by an unidentified male patron who carried her to the parking lot. Respondent later collapsed in the parking lot area around the Club and initiated an altercation while others, including patrons from the club, were attempting to calm and persuade her to leave the area peacefully. G.H. was escorted back into the club by a female employee so that she would not witness Respondent's incoherent and hysterical behavior. Respondent was physically violent and struck a patron from the club who was attempting to assist her. She was likewise verbally abusive to all those around her and yelled at one patron to "get the f away" [from her]. Respondent finally had to be physically restrained to prevent her from further attacking patrons and injuring herself. Respondent was engaging in self destructive behavior including striking her head against the concrete in the parking lot. Bates had to summon the security police as well as emergency medical personnel to the scene due to Respondent's conduct. Although Respondent consummed approximately three drinks while in the NCO club lounge, she did not appear intoxicated nor was her speech slurred. Respondent is a small petite woman, approximately 4'11" tall and weighs under 100 pounds. Upon the arrival of the security police, Respondent continued to react violently requiring four-point body restraints. Respondent was taken to the Emergency Room at MacDill by ambulance in restraints where she continued to react in an abusive and violent manner, both physically and verbally. Respondent remained in the Emergency Room at MacDill for approximately four hours. During that time, she never calmed down or became rational. Respondent was physically abusive to those who attempted to administer treatment to her and she spit at the Emergency Room personnel. It became necessary for other patients to be removed from the area where Respondent was being treated based on her disruptive conduct. Dr. Stein, a physician at MacDill, evaluated Respondent and executed the necessary paperwork to transfer her to Tampa General Hospital for psychiatric evaluation pursuant to the statutory provisions of the Baker Act (Chapter 394, Florida Statutes). Prior to Respondent's departure to Tampa General Hospital, Raymond E. Hook, Jr., the shift supervisor in the Emergency Room, inventoried Respondent's personal effects. Hook's inventory of Respondent's purse revealed a bottle of assorted pills which could not be identified and he threw them away. Hook also found a portable red ashtray in her purse containing several partially burned marijuana cigarettes and a misdemeanor amount of a substance that resembled marijuana. A field test and subsequent laboratory analysis of the substance resulted in a positive marijuana identification. G.H. was housed at MacDill while Respondent was being admitted to the psychiatric unit of Tampa General. Kevin C. Ambler, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney and Prosecutor at MacDill, received and reviewed the charges filed against Respondent. As a result of his review of the facts and the lab analysis of the substance found in Respondent's purse, Captain Ambler filed a complaint charging Respondent with misdemeanor possession of marijuana. During the pendency of the criminal case, Respondent's criminal defense attorney raised an insanity defense and Captain Ambler determined, based on that defense and the fact that the charge was a misdemeanor offense, it was not worth the government's time and effort to proceed with the case. Captain Ambler moved to dismiss the charges without prejudice. The motion to dismiss was granted. However, as a condition of dismissal, Respondent was ordered not to re-enter MacDill for a period of one year except for approved medical assistance. Should Respondent violate that condition, she faces reactivation of the criminal charges with sanctions of a possible $500.00 fine and imprisonment for not more than six months, or a combination thereof. During February 1988, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) received a child abuse report alleging that Respondent abused G.H. Gwendolyn McKenzie, a child protective investigator (CPI) was assigned the case and conducted an investigation. CPI McKenzie found that G.H. was emotionally and physically abused by Respondent after discovering that she engaged in a repeated pattern of abusive conduct including gagging the child, tying her hands to the bed and engaging in excessive corporal punishment by repeatedly striking her with a belt. McKenzie's investigation revealed that Respondent gave G.H. hot sauce to eat and forced her to drink liquid detergent as a means of discipline. G.H. suffered verbal and emotional abuse at Respondent's hands. CPI McKenzie also observed final stages of bruising over G.H.'s body which Respondent inflicted to discipline G.H. Respondent's mother, Lois Pitts-Alcorn also observed that Respondent committed excessive physical and mental abuse to G.H. She tried on numerous occasions to stop Respondent from abusing G.H. without success. She therefore reported Respondent to HRS for committing physical and mental abuse to G.H. for G.H.'s protection. Additionally, Pitts-Alcorn observed that Respondent took G.H. out at night while she attended bars and left her alone (unsupervised) in the car for extended periods of time. On March 6, 1988, HRS filed a petition in juvenile court in Polk County, Florida, alleging that Respondent physically and emotionally abused G.H. As a result of that petition, G.H. was adjudicated a dependent child and she was removed from Respondent's custody and placed with her grandmother. Based on Respondent's conduct at the hearing on the dependency petition, the judge ordered a psychological evaluation of Respondent. Pursuant to that evaluation, Respondent was found to be psychotic, her prognosis was very poor; and Respondent represented a threat to G.H. both physically and emotionally and should not regain custody. CPI McKenzie recommended, during the dependency hearing, that Respondent receive in-depth counseling and that G.H. likewise receive counseling to recover from the abuse she suffered at the hands of Respondent. Respondent has a history of drug and alcohol abuse as well as violent and explosive conduct which manifested itself during her parenting of G.H. and her employment with the Polk County School Board during 1988-89. Respondent, while employed as a substitute teacher on two separate occasions, at separate schools in Polk County, struck a child in her classroom. Respondent's conduct posed a danger to her student's well-being. Respondent was removed from the list of approved substitute teachers by the School Board of Polk County, Florida, based on assistant superintendent Don R. Cox' examination of complaints and an investigation of such complaints by the Polk County School Board. Likewise, Cox received reports from Respondent's colleagues complaining of Respondent's violent and abusive conduct while employed as a substitute teacher in Polk County. Respondent will not be considered for further employment by Polk County, Florida, based on their determination that Respondent poses dangerous and erratic behavior to those in her classroom.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that: Petitioner enter a Final Order revoking Respondent's Florida teaching certificate for a period of five (5) years. Respondent undergo psychiatric and drug treatment and demonstrate proof of adequate rehabilitation under conditions in accordance with the standards and procedures for recertification of teachers by the Education Practices Commission. RECOMMENDED this 26th day of September, 1990, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. JAMES E. BRADWELL 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 26th day of September, 1990.
The Issue Whether Petitioner demonstrated entitlement to issuance of a Florida Educator’s Certificate.
Findings Of Fact Respondent, as Commissioner of the Florida Department of Education, is charged with the duty to issue Florida Educator's Certificates to persons seeking authorization to become school teachers in the State of Florida. Petitioner is a current resident of Puerto Rico. Petitioner was convicted of federal conspiracy to commit money laundering on October 26, 1999, and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 46 months, with credit for time served. Petitioner was released from prison in April 2001. He began teaching physical education in Puerto Rico, starting in August 2001. He has taught continuously in Puerto Rico for the past 17 years without incident. Stipulated Facts Petitioner was charged with multiple criminal offenses in the case of United States of America v. Luis Amarante, a/k/a Chiqui, a/k/a El Grandote, et al., Criminal Case No. 98-189(HL). Petitioner pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case of United States of America v. Luis Amarante, a/k/a Chiqui, a/k/a El Grandote, et al., Criminal Case No. 98-189(HL). Petitioner was found guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case of United States v. Luis Amarante, a/k/a Chiqui, a/k/a El Grandote, et al., Criminal Case 98-189(HL). Petitioner was sentenced to serve 46 months in prison based upon his plea agreement entered in the case of United States of America v. Luis Amarante, a/k/a Chiqui, a/k/a El Grandote, et al., Criminal Case 98-189(HL). Petitioner submitted an application for a Florida Educator’s Certificate on July 13, 2016. On the application, Petitioner answered “no” to the questions: “Have you ever been convicted of a criminal offense?” “Have you ever been found guilty of a criminal offense?” “Have you ever pled guilty to a criminal offense?” The answer of “no” to each of these questions was false. Petitioner submitted written responses to Respondent’s Request for Admissions on November 6, 2018, in which he affirmed in writing his statements set forth above. Facts Adduced at Hearing Immediately below Petitioner’s electronic signature on his application was the following: WARNING: GIVING FALSE INFORMATION IN ORDER TO OBTAIN OR RENEW A FLORIDA EDUCATOR’S CERTIFICATE IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE UNDER FLORIDA LAW. ANYONE GIVING FALSE INFORMATION ON THIS AFFIDAVIT IS SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, AS WELL AS DISCIPLINARY ACTION BY THE EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION. Petitioner was not able to convincingly explain why he would have checked “no” for three separate questions regarding his criminal conviction on the electronic application. His testimony ranged from an unsuccessful attempt to change his answer to the question before he submitted it via his telephone, to a misunderstanding as to the period of time for which information was being requested. There was no evidence that Petitioner contacted the Department of Education to correct, amend, or withdraw his application. Petitioner gave no indication of an inability to perform the duties of a physical education teacher. The crime for which he was convicted was non-violent in nature, and occurred more than 20 years ago. He testified that he “talk[s] with young people and I explain what I did, you know, trying to -- they don’t do the same, you know, that they continue in the right path.” Petitioner appeared to be sincere in his desire to teach with the benefit of his experience. Despite the foregoing, it is Petitioner’s burden to demonstrate his entitlement to an Educator’s Certificate. Petitioner testified as to his 17 years of teaching in Puerto Rico -- which testimony is entitled to some degree of weight, as the passage of time can be persuasive evidence of rehabilitation and good character. The application includes the jurisdiction, certificate numbers, and dates of expiration for his Puerto Rico Teacher’s Certificate. The evidence that Petitioner has been certified to teach and has been employed as a physical education teacher in Puerto Rico was not disputed by Respondent. The testimony offered by Petitioner at the formal hearing failed to provide any explanation or contrition for his criminal conduct. He offered no specific proof of his good moral character in the form of admissible references from employers or coworkers to substantiate his testimony.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Education enter a final order denying Petitioner, Luis Amarante’s application for a Florida Educator’s Certificate. DONE AND ENTERED this 14th day of January, 2019, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S GARY EARLY 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 14th day of January, 2019.
Findings Of Fact Thomas Pelley, the Respondent, holds Florida Teaching Certificate No. 318598, Standard, Rank III, valid through June 30, 1982, covering the area of furniture repair. The Respondent was employed during the 1978-79 school year in the public schools of Orange County at the Westside Adult Center in Winter Garden, Florida, as an instructor in furniture upholstery. The then Florida Professional Practices Council received a report from officials of the Orange County School System indicating that the Respondent had allegedly misappropriated school funds to his personal use. Pursuant to Rule 6A-4.37, Florida Administrative Code, an inquiry was conducted into the matter and a report made to the Professional Practices Council which culminated in the Commissioner of Education finding probable cause to file a proceeding against the Respondent, which probable cause finding was entered on November 5, 1979. The Respondent and his students typically engaged in the repair and re- upholstery of furniture brought in by members of the public at a reduced price as part of the training program in the occupation of re-upholstery. The procedure for payment for this re-upholstery work was that the customers wrote a check after Mr. Pelley wrote a "training order" and then Mr. Pelley was to submit the customer's money to the school bookkeeper in order to requisition material for the re-upholstery work involved. At the conclusion of the job the customer would come to the school office and pay for whatever charges were left for the labor and take custody of the furniture. Mr. Pelley did not comply with that procedure, however, with regard to customers Vicki Teal, Carol Johnson, and Winifred Good. In these instances involving work done for these customers, the Respondent was paid by the customers directly. The Respondent was fully informed of the proper procedure for payment by the customers for upholstery work. Customer Vicki Teal complained on one occasion that a sofa she had left to be re-upholstered had the wrong material installed on it and that Mr. Pelley had refused to replace the materials with those that she had actually ordered. Ms. Good and Ms. Johnson similarly complained about the workmanship on the furniture they had left to be repaired. With all three of these customers, the office personnel at the school discovered that they had no record that the customers had ever ordered work to be done by the Respondent and his students, nor that they had purchased anything, until they came forward with their cancel led checks for the same. Each of the checks was endorsed by Mr. Pelley. The subject checks from these three customers totaled $515.29, the funds represented which were received by the Respondent and never turned over to officials of the school, the bookkeeper of the school nor anyone employed by the Orange County School Board for proper accounting and use. Rather, the Respondent converted all of the monies collected to his own personal use. Witness House, who worked with the Respondent at the same school and who was his superior, has had long experience in the education profession and in teaching and dealing with students. He established that such conduct is not a proper example to students and is sufficiently notorious to bring the Respondent and the education profession into public disgrace and disrespect, especially in view of the several members of the public directly involved and victimized by the Respondent's misdeeds. It should be pointed out that at the times pertinent hereto, the Respondent was in severe financial straits due to medical expenses incurred by his wife being stricken with cancer.
Recommendation Having considered the foregoing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and pleadings and arguments of counsel for the Petitioner, it is, therefore, RECOMMENDED: That Respondent be found guilty of wrongfully converting monies to his own use that rightfully belonged to the Orange County School Board, which conduct constitutes gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude and seriously reduces the Respondent's effectiveness as an employee of the School Board; and that the Respondent's Teaching Certificate be revoked for one (1) year. DONE and ENTERED this 19th day of March, 1982, 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 th Division of Administrative Hearing this 19th day of March, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: J. David Holder, Esquire BERG AND HOLDER Post Office Box 1694 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Mr. Thomas Pelley 149 Silver Star Road Ocoee, Florida 32761 Donald L. Griesheimer Executive Director Education Practices Commission Department of Education 125 Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Findings Of Fact At relevant times to this inquiry Respondent has held the teaching certificate number 664911 in the area of substitute teacher issued by the Petitioner. In the case of the State of Florida v. Robert Ray Stone, in the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida in and for Marion County, Case Number 90-1630-CF-A-W, Respondent was charged with two counts of vehicular homicide, a single count of leaving the scene of an accident in which a death was involved and a single count of evidence tampering. The accident was alleged to have occurred on May 6, 1990 and the alleged evidence tampering was said to have occurred between May 6 and May 12, 1990. On April 30, 1991 Respondent was tried, found guilty and was adjudicated guilty of unlawfully and willfully failing to stop his vehicle at the scene of an accident or as close thereto as possible, or forthwith to return to that scene and fulfill the reporting requirements and rendering of aid requirements set out in Section 316.062, Florida Statutes, thus violating Section 316.027, Florida Statutes. He pled and was adjudicated guilty of unlawfully and knowingly altering, destroying, concealing, or removing any record, document or thing, in this instance an automobile and/or automobile parts with the purpose to impair its verity or availability in any proceeding or investigation, knowing full well that a criminal trial or proceeding or an investigation by duly constituted prosecuting authority, law enforcement agency or grand jury of the state was pending or was about to be instituted, and through such evidence tampering violated Section 918.13(1)(a), Florida Statutes. The accident in question involved death. These offenses in Counts 3 and 4 to the information to which Respondent offered his pleas were third degree felonies. The two counts of vehicular homicide were not pursued and are not part of the judgment and sentence in the aforementioned case. For his plea Respondent was given concurrent sentences of twelve months imprisonment for Counts 3 and 4 to the second amended information, followed by six years probation to run concurrent. In the imposition of the sentence the court also recommended payment of restitution and investigative costs, alcohol counseling, and that the Respondent consume no alcohol and that the driver's license of the Respondent be revoked for a period of three years. Knowledge of the crime was publicized in the Ocala Star Banner in its July 10, 1990 edition. Frank Washington, Jr., Director of Personnel for the Marion County School System, Marion County, Florida, in which Respondent had been employed as a substitute teacher, offered his opinion on the Respondent's effectiveness to serve as a substitute teacher following the subject incident. Mr. Washington has 31 years of experience in education to include classroom instruction at the elementary, junior high and high school level, service as assistant principal or principal in elementary and middle schools as well as his administrative service. Mr. Washington holds a Florida certificate to teach. Mr. Washington is somewhat familiar with the criminal law case against the Respondent. As a consequence of the case Respondent has been removed from the approved list of substitute teachers in the Marion County School System. Mr. Washington's opinion on the effectiveness of the Respondent to carry forward his duties as a substitute teacher is that Respondent's effectiveness has been reduced. This is especially true given that the school system has limited control over substitute teachers as contrasted with full-time teachers. Mr. Washington's concerns about Respondent's effectiveness also addresses the apparent disregard for human life evidenced by the Respondent in his conduct in leaving the scene of an accident where a human life was lost and the deceit demonstrated by the Respondent in his evidence tampering following the accident. Mr. Washington does not believe that this type individual needs to be in the classroom working with children in a posture where children are to be taught good citizenship. Mr. Washington's opinion on loss of effectiveness is accepted.
Recommendation Upon the consideration of the facts found and conclusions of law reached, it is recommended: That the teaching certificate as a substitute teacher, No. 664911, held by Robert R. Stone be revoked for a period of ten years. RECOMMENDED this 31st day of March, 1992, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 31st day of March, 1992.
