The Issue Whether Respondent's teaching certificate should be revoked pursuant to Chapter 231, Florida Statutes, as set forth in petition, dated November 8, 1979.
Findings Of Fact Respondent Robert Marshall Stabler holds Florida Teaching Certificate No. 306751, Graduate, Rank III, valid through June 30, 1981, covering the area of elementary education. He was so licensed on May 9, 1979. (Stipulation.) Respondent was employed in the public schools of Brevard County at Pineda Elementary School, Cocoa, Florida, as a teacher from 1971 to May 1979. Respondent was also employed by Brevard Community College to instruct inmates at the Brevard Correctional Institution at Sharpes, Florida, for several years prior to May 9, 1979. (Testimony of Fisher, Brock, Curtis.) In late April 1979 a correctional officer at the Brevard Correctional Institution received information from a confidential informant, who was an inmate, that Respondent would bring marijuana into the institution on May 9, 1979. On that date, at approximately 6:15 p.m., Respondent entered the correctional facility and was advised by a correctional officer that college instructors were going to be searched that evening. Respondent was asked to submit to such a search and he consented to the same. Respondent was thereupon directed to the nearby "shakedown" room where his briefcase was opened and three packages wrapped in white paper were discovered. At this time, Respondent stated "That's just for my own use." A white envelope containing thirteen five dollar bills was also found in the briefcase. A narcotics officer of the Brevard County Sheriff's Department thereupon weighed and made a standard field test of the material contained in the packages and determined that it was cannabis in excess of 100 grams. The officer then placed Respondent under arrest for introducing contraband upon the grounds of a correctional institution. The packages were thereafter submitted to the Sanford Crime Laboratory for analysis and it was determined that they contained a total of 106.6 grams of cannabis and that two of these packages contained more than five grams of cannabis leaf material. (Testimony of Fisher, Pierce, Steger, Thomas, Boling, Petitioner's Exhibits 1-4.) The regulations of the Brevard Correctional Institution authorize a search of visitors which is normally conducted on a random basis. If consent to search is not given, the non-consenting individual is not permitted to enter the institution. (Testimony of Thomas.) Respondent received outstanding teacher performance evaluations at Pineda Elementary School during prior years and is considered by his principal to be an above-average teacher. Another faculty member at the school characterized him as an "excellent" teacher. He excelled in dealing with students with disciplinary problems and had excellent relations with both students and faculty personnel. He was also considered by his supervisor and a fellow instructor to be the most outstanding teacher at the Brevard Correctional Institution who was highly successful in motivating his students. (Testimony of Curtis, Brock, Walker, Weimer, Respondent's Composite Exhibit 1.)
Recommendation That Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for a period of four years. DONE AND ENTERED this 12th day of May 1980 in Tallahassee, Florida. THOMAS C. OLDHAM Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 101 Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 12th day of May 1980. COPIES FURNISHED: Hugh Ingram, Administrator Professional Practices Council Room 3, 319 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Craig Wilson, Esquire 315 Third Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 R. V. Richards, Esquire 1526 South Washington Avenue Titusville, Florida 32780
Conclusions THIS CAUSE comes before the State of Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration, (“the Agency”) regarding certificate of need ("CON") application number 10158 filed by North Florida Regional Medical Center, Inc. (“NFRMC”). 1. NFRMC filed a CON application which sought the establishment of a 24-bed comprehensive medical rehabilitation unit within its hospital located in Alachua County, Florida, Service District 3. The Agency denied NFRMC’s CON application 10158. ; 1 Filed November 4, 2013 11:11 AM Division of Administrative Hearings 2. NFRMC filed a petition for formal hearing challenging the Agency’s denial of CON application number 10158. 3. Shands Teaching Hospital and Clinics, Inc. d/b/a Shands Rehab Hospital, filed a petition for formal hearing in support of the Agency’s denial of NFRMC’s CON application 10158. 4. NFERMC has since voluntarily dismissed its petition for formal hearing. 5. Based upon the voluntary dismissal, the Division of Administrative Hearings entered an Order Closing Files and Relinquishing Jurisdiction in the above styled matter. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 6. The denial of NFRMC’s CON application 10158 is UPHELD. ORDERED in Tallahassee, Florida on this DD day of Octet. 2013. cbc Peele Elizabeth Dudek, Secretary Agency for Health Care Administration _NOTICE OF RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW A party who is adversely affected by this final order is entitled to judicial review. which shall be instituted by filing the original notice of appeal with the agency clerk of AHCA, and a copy along with the filing fee prescribed by law with the district court of appeal in the appellate district where the Agency maintains its headquarters or where a party resides. Review proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the Florida appellate rules. The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the rendition of the order to be reviewed. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Final Order has been furnished by U.S. Mail or electronic mail to the persons named below on this f "__ day of Nove~ hes _, 2013. Richard J. Shoop, Agency Cler| Agency for Health Care Administration 2727 Mahan Drive, Mail Stop #3 Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (850) 412-3630 Janice Mills Facilities Intake Unit Agency for Health Care Administration (Electronic Mail) James McLemore, Supervisor Certificate of Need Unit Agency for Health Care Administration (Electronic Mail) Elizabeth W. McArthur Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings (Electronic Mail) Stephen A. Ecenia, Esquire R. David Prescott, Esquire Rutledge Ecenia, P.A. 119 South Monroe Street, Suite 202 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Counsel for NFRMC (U.S. Mail) Lorraine M. Novak, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Agency for Health Care Administration {Electronic Mail), F. Philip Blank, Esquire Blank & Meehan, P.A. 204 South Monroe Strect Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Counsel for Shands Rehab Hospital (U.S. Mail) we
The Issue The issues in this case are: (1) whether Petitioner has been rehabilitated from her disqualifying offense(s); and, if so, whether the intended action to deny Petitioner's exemption request pursuant to section 435.07(3), Florida Statutes (2015),1/ would constitute an abuse of discretion by Respondent.
Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence adduced at the hearing, and the record as a whole, the following material Findings of Fact are made: Petitioner was a 52-year-old female who sought to qualify, pursuant to section 435.07, for employment in a position of trust as a direct service provider for physically or mentally disabled adults or children. This position requires the successful completion of a Level 2 background screening. See § 435.04, Fla. Stat. APD is the state agency responsible for licensing and regulating the employment of persons in positions of trust. Specifically, the mission of the Agency includes serving and protecting the vulnerable population, including children or adults with developmental disabilities. In conformance with the statute, Petitioner was screened by APD since she applied for a position of special trust as a direct service provider of APD. The screening revealed, and the parties stipulated at the hearing, that Petitioner was convicted of the following disqualifying offenses: Theft by Shoplifting--Felony--1987 Theft by Shoplifting--Felony--1987 Forgery (4 counts)--Felonies--1993 Theft by Shoplifting--Felony--1993 Battery-Family Violence--Misdemeanor-- 1996 Forgery--Felony--1998 The stipulation also included the fact that 17 years have elapsed since the last disqualifying offense was committed. The screening revealed, and the parties also stipulated at the hearing, that Petitioner was arrested or convicted of the following non-disqualifying offenses: Simple Battery--Misdemeanor--arrested-- dismissed--1987 Theft by Conversion--convicted--1993 Driving Under the Influence--convicted-- 1994 Criminal Trespass--Misdemeanor-- convicted--2000 The stipulation also included the fact that 15 years have elapsed since the last non-disqualifying arrest or conviction was committed. Rosita Martin At the time of the hearing, Petitioner was unemployed. She had last been employed at Martin's Group Home as a caregiver of vulnerable children who had disabilities or behavioral problems. Her duties included giving out medicines, assisting clients with bathing, and taking kids on outings and to church. She also helped to cook. She explained that most of her convictions occurred during a period of her life when she was in an abusive marriage and suffered from depression. She acknowledged that, during that time period, she was abusing drugs (cocaine) and alcohol. During that same period of time, she admitted that she had purchased and also possessed marijuana. She explained that her battery conviction in 1996 related to a domestic dispute with her husband. She called the police, and they took them both to jail. Although she said she was defending herself, she admitted that she had been convicted and found guilty of battery. Petitioner testified that she is a "good girl now." She attends church every Sunday and "left her problems with drugs." She got sick and tired and "told God to take it away from me and he did." Petitioner testified that she has not used any type of illegal drugs for 20 years. Her sister operates four group homes for children with disabilities. Petitioner worked at one of the homes, and her sister wrote her a letter of support in this case. The evidence was undisputed that she received "excellent" evaluations while at Martin Group Home. Currently, she lives with her daughter, and a granddaughter who is two years old. As a result of one of Petitioner's various felony convictions, she testified that she was ordered to attend in- house drug treatment at the Willingway Hospital in Statesboro, Georgia. Upon questioning by the undersigned, Petitioner stated that she was in rehabilitation at the hospital for "like 6 months" back in the 1990's.2/ The various letters of support and reference provided by Petitioner came from her relatives. These included her sister and father. The record reflects that Petitioner attended and successfully completed numerous training courses (e.g. medicine administration, CPR training, blood borne pathogens, HIV safeguards, etc.) that related to the caretaker work she performs.3/ Other than two certificates for domestic violence training in 2011 and 2012, the other training and educational completion certificates did not relate to treatment or counseling programs related to her drug use, alcohol use, psychological counseling, or financial training-–the personal issues she struggled with in her past when the disqualifying events took place. The evidence reflected that she had numerous and chronic driving violations, pertaining primarily to failing to pay road tolls. She claimed that all of these toll violations occurred when her daughter was driving her car.4/ On cross-examination, Petitioner conceded that she failed to provide a detailed version of the facts or a full explanation for each criminal offense listed on her exemption form.5/ Petitioner claimed that she was "new at this" and did not understand the details she was supposed to provide. For the criminal offenses involving theft of property, she claimed on the form, and testified, that there was "no harm" to the victim. Again, she claimed some confusion and stated that she thought that they were talking about harm in the "violent" sense. She was also cross-examined about the six-month drug treatment program that she testified she had attended at Willingway Hospital. She was asked why she did not provide that information to the Agency in the exemption form or provide the agency with a copy of a completion certificate. Inexplicably, she was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation during the hearing for why she did not disclose the drug treatment program on the exemption questionnaire. She claimed that since the court had ordered her into treatment, she did not think it was necessary to specifically list or describe it. She was asked why she was not able to provide a letter of recommendation from her church pastor. She did not provide an adequate explanation and simply stated that she attends church but is not a church member, that she just goes to church there every Sunday. She worked briefly at a company called Best Walks of Life. Her supervisor was her son, Mr. Walker. No details were provided concerning what she did there. She acknowledged that much of her criminal activity arose from or was related to problems with monetary or financial issues; yet, she conceded that she had not taken any financial courses or other classes to obtain financial or budgeting training or counseling. After working for her sister at Martin Group Home, she has not made any attempts to work in any other places or group homes since leaving. Darnisha Johnson Petitioner is her mother. The witness is 24 years old and lives with her daughter at her mother's house. She testified that her mother is "a great person today. She's great." She also stated that her mother is a "much better person" then when she was involved in criminal activity.6/ She also felt that her mother is not using any drugs now. She acknowledged that she has a car, but that it is in her mother's name. In the context of who pays the bills today and supports her financially, she characterized her mother's role as being her "support system." She also admitted that any failures to pay tolls while driving the vehicle registered in her mother's name were her responsibility. Molita Cunningham She is a friend of Petitioner's. She works as a certified nursing assistant and is certified as such with the State of Florida. She has known Petitioner for a little over three years and met her at a Family Dollar store. She wrote a letter of support for Petitioner. She was not aware of any facts to suggest that Petitioner was engaged in criminal activity, drug abuse, or abuse of her clients in any manner. She acknowledged she had a background similar to Petitioner's. She was "out there in the streets" and is a convicted felon. Other than being a general character witness, the witness offered no substantive evidence touching upon Petitioner's rehabilitation from the disqualifying offenses. Evelyn Alvarez Ms. Alvarez is employed with the Agency as the regional operations manager for the Southern Region.7/ She obtained a master's degree in public administration from Florida International University in 2000. APD serves individuals that have specific developmental disabilities. The disabilities include intellectual disabilities, autism, cerebral palsy, spina bifida, and the like. Her role in this case was to review the background information gathered by both the Department of Children and Families and APD on Petitioner. After her review, the package of information was sent to an exemption committee. That committee then independently reviewed the exemption package and made its own recommendation to the Director of APD. Before deciding on the exemption request, the Director reviewed both Ms. Alvarez's recommendation and the recommendation of the exemption committee. She correctly acknowledged that the applicant for an exemption from disqualification must prove rehabilitation by clear and convincing evidence. She also correctly noted that the Agency should consider the circumstances of the disqualifying offense(s), the nature of the harm caused to any victims involved, the history of the employee since the incident and any other evidence indicating that the employee will not present a danger to the vulnerable or disabled adults or children they serve. APD was concerned that Petitioner failed to follow directions and provide the details for each disqualifying criminal event.8/ Also, Ms. Alvarez was concerned that Petitioner's failure to acknowledge that someone was "harmed" by the theft or forgery crimes ignores that there were victims involved, and the response fails to show an acceptance of responsibility for the crime(s). Ms. Alvarez testified that the Agency has no idea what happened with each of the disqualifying events, or of any circumstances that were happening at the time that would allow APD to understand why Petitioner would commit the offenses, and that there was no acknowledgment of any harm to any victims. In the opinion of Ms. Alvarez, the training certificates provided by Petitioner were not persuasive evidence of rehabilitation. More specifically, they were only indicative of employment training and did not include anything in terms of addressing Petitioner's substance abuse issues, her inability to manage her finances, or her involvement in acts of domestic violence. In APD's opinion, the lack of any treatment or professional counseling for those issues militated against a finding of rehabilitation. Likewise, Petitioner did not describe her alleged six- month, in-house drug rehabilitation program in the exemption application, nor was there any certificate of completion of drug treatment provided. APD concluded that Petitioner used poor judgment during an incident when she invited her friend, Ms. Cunningham, to spend a day on the job at Martin Group Home with Petitioner's disabled and vulnerable children. APD felt that this was a breach of client confidentiality, HIPAA rights, and may have put some of the children at risk around a visitor who did not have a background check or clearance to be at the facility. There were no professional references or letters of support offered by Petitioner from past employers (other than from group homes involving her relative). Likewise, there were no letters attesting to her good moral character from her church or other faith-based relationships she may have established. Ms. Alvarez testified that the reason the Agency wants letters of reference from individuals who do not have a conflict of interest is to show her character. Examples of letters of reference would be from a pastor or from an organization where someone had volunteered. The letters provided by Petitioner, while useful, did not reflect an impartial view of her character.9/ The Agency determined that it had no basis of reference for the character of Petitioner due to her failure to provide more impartial references.10/ In Ms. Alvarez's opinion, after reviewing the completed application, Petitioner had not provided any evidence, and APD had no knowledge, to support a finding of rehabilitation. Furthermore, APD did not have any knowledge of any financial planning or budgeting courses that Petitioner may have taken to show rehabilitation in the area of her finances. APD considered it significant during its review that Petitioner had been charged with driving while license suspended ("DWLS") (a criminal traffic offense) in 2012 and again in 2013, less than two years before the application. (Both DWLS offenses were subsequently dismissed.) Respondent's Exhibit 9, Petitioner's Florida Comprehensive Case Information System driving record, reflects in excess of 20 failures to pay required highway tolls in a two-year period from 2012 to 2013.11/ Petitioner did not provide any explanation for her driver's license problems to the Agency at the time of her Exemption Application. The Agency had no knowledge of the facts and circumstances surrounding the DWLS citations. Ms. Alvarez testified that traffic offenses and driving habits are important considerations, since direct service providers are often required to transport persons with developmental disabilities In essence, APD concluded that Petitioner had fallen short of her burden of showing rehabilitation by clear and convincing evidence.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Agency for Persons with Disabilities confirm its previous intended denial and enter a final order denying Petitioner's application for an exemption from disqualification. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of July, 2016, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ROBERT L. KILBRIDE 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 27th day of July, 2016.
Findings Of Fact On December 27, 1991, the Petitioner, Peter B. Dolinger, filed a Petition for Administrative Determination of Rule Validity. In the Petition, the Petitioner challenged Rule 33-8.009(10), Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 120.56, Florida Statutes. The Petitioner alleged that he was an inmate of the Pasco County Jail/Detention Center. Subsequent to the filing of the Petition, the Petitioner was released from custody. The Petitioner is no longer subject to the rules of the Respondent, including the Challenged Rule. The Petitioner has failed to allege any facts which would support a conclusion that he is currently subject to the Challenged Rule or that the Challenged Rule has any continuing impact on him. Section 944.09, Florida Statutes, requires that the Respondent, an agency of the State of Florida, adopt rules governing the administration of the correctional system in Florida.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner was born February 22, 1924. He graduated from high school in 1942 and attended Rhode Island College School of Nursing from 1970 until graduation in 1974. At the time of his application for licensure by endorsement in Florida in 1976, Cox was registered in Rhode Island and Connecticut. On his application he listed Lois Cox as his wife. At the hearing Respondent testified he and Lois Cox were never married. Exhibit 2 states they had lived together for about seven years when, in late November of 1981, Lois Cox moved to a different address in Lauderhill, Florida. On January 6, 1982, Respondent came to the residence of Lois Cox, asked to speak to her outside in the vicinity of his car, and after some discussion Respondent took a pistol from his car and shot Lois Cox several times in the head and shoulder. On September 24, 1982, Respondent was found guilty of attempted murder II (lesser) and possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony offense. He was sentenced to be imprisoned for 25 years (Exhibit 3). Respondent worked through PRN, Inc., for two years immediately preceding his arrest, in various hospitals in Broward County. No complaints were ever received regarding Respondent's professional performance, and evaluations by supervisory personnel were good (Exhibit 4). No evidence was presented that Respondent had ever been convicted of any other crime. Petitioner presented one witness, Mrs. Geraldine Johnson, who qualified as an expert, to opine that the offenses of which Respondent had been found guilty directly affects the ability to practice nursing. Her rationale for this opinion is that a nurse is supposed to help, not hurt, a patient; and often a nurse is placed in a position where the nurse must defend against the patient and in so doing the nurse must not react in a violent manner. Ergo, one who has been found guilty of attempted murder has demonstrated such violent tendencies that he no longer has the ability to practice nursing. This expert witness is the Supervisor of Investigative Services, Region II of the Department of Professional Regulation, and she, and the investigators working under her supervision, investigate complaints against nurses and submit reports from which the bases for the probable cause determinations are made by the probable cause panel of the Board of Nursing. This opinion is rejected as beyond the expertise of the witness.
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner testified in his own behalf, admitting that he had failed to answer Question 13, "Have you ever been arrested?" honestly. He stated that he had been embarrassed to put down the fact that he had been arrested. He stated that he had applied for the position as an unarmed security guard with Oxford Security Services thinking that it would be a temporary position. However, since his employment he has been promoted to safety coordinator, salesman and supervisor/operations manager of the company's operations in the Jacksonville area. The applicant was first employed in June of 1979. He stated that he needed to be licensed in order to maintain his present position. The applicant explained his arrest in 1963 and in 1977. His arrest in 1963 was for larceny and arose from taking money belong to the company by which he was employed and purchasing a car with it. The court withheld adjudication and placed the applicant on probation for five years. During that time he married and left the State of Florida in violation of the terms of his probation. In 1977, the applicant was employed in Jacksonville, Florida, as a used car salesman. After a 24-hour sale-athon, the applicant began bar-hopping and ended up in a topless go-go club. His next conscious recollection was waking up in the Duval County jail, where he was advised that he was charged with lewd and lascivious conduct. He had no knowledge of the conduct which gave rise to his arrest. The Duval County court advised the applicant to enter a plea of nolo contendere and be transferred to Miami court for disposition of the applicant's offense of parole violation. The Duval County court sentenced the applicant to two days for lewd and lascivious conduct, during which time he was transferred to the Dade County courts. The charges of violating parole in Dade County were dismissed. The applicant further explained his arrest for passing a worthless bank check. The applicant stated that he had overdrawn his account unknowingly in 1971. He was arrested and paid off the overdraft, and the charge was dismissed. The applicant stated that his employer was not aware of his arrest record.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that the applicant's application for a Class F, unarmed guard license be denied; however, that the applicant be afforded the opportunity to refile his application with full disclosure, and that in the absence of any other disqualifying grounds said reapplication be approved. DONE and ORDERED this 6th day of February, 1980, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of February, 1980. COPIES FURNISHED: W. J. Gladwin, Jr., Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of State The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Wayne M. Chadwick 865 Lane Avenue, #703 Jacksonville, Florida 32205 =================================================================
Findings Of Fact Respondent, Roxie E. Vause, was certified by Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission on September, 1979 and was issued Certificate No. 99- 2566. On August 30, 1986, Roxie E. Vause was Chief Investigator with the Wakulla County Sheriff's Department (WCSD). At Approximately 11:00 a.m., on August 30, 1986, Eric Hindle, Chief of Paramedics and Ambulance Services in Wakulla County, was contacted by his dispatcher who reported Roxie Vause had called stating he had been in an automobile accident and requested Hindle's assistance. Hindle, who was a neighbor of Vause, had known Vause for many years and had had many years experience as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT). As an EMT, he had dealt with many individuals who were injured and who were suffering from psychotic episodes. Hindle drove to the Vause home with two of his employees where he spoke with Vause's wife and learned that Vause was not at his house. While Hindle was talking with Vause's wife, Patrick Kennedy, a uniformed Wakulla County Deputy Sheriff, also arrived. Kennedy and Vause's wife left in Kennedy's patrol car to visit a house where Vause's wife thought he might be. Hindle decided to drive in the direction of Hindle's house searching for Vause. At approximately 12:00 noon, Hindle viewed Vause walking along the side of the unpaved road in the vicinity of Hindle's home. Vause had his hands and arms held across his stomach as though he were in pain. Hindle radioed that he had found Vause and their location. Hindle then drove his car along side Vause, stopped, and abruptly approached Vause, who reacted as though he were frightened and drew his pistol, pointing it at Hindle. Although they were neighbors and had worked together professionally for years, it was Hindle's opinion that Vause did not recognize him at that time and was having a psychotic episode. Hindle was of the opinion that Vause had been drinking alcohol and did not know where he was or what he was doing. Hindle quieted Vause down and Vause responded to Hindle, putting his pistol away. Hindle was talking with Vause, continuing to pacify him and attempting to place him in Hindle's care for transportation to the hospital when Kennedy arrived in his patrol car with Vause's wife. Kennedy approached Vause from the rear and placed his hand on Vause's shoulder. Kennedy was dressed in uniform and had worked with Vause before. When he was touched, Vause turned towards Kennedy and when he saw his uniform, he began to shout incoherently and redrew his pistol. Kennedy grabbed Vause's hands, holding the gun down between them, and Hindle, Kennedy, and another EMT wrestled Vause to the ground where Kennedy handcuffed him. Hindle was of the opinion that Vause did not know who Kennedy was or what was happening. After he was handcuffed, Kennedy talked with Vause; and as he talked with Vause, it seemed that Vause recognized Kennedy and calmed down again. When he was calm, Kennedy took the handcuffs off and continued to discuss what was going on with Vause. When Kennedy discussed sending Vause to the hospital, Vause went wild again, striking Kennedy in the face with his fist. Kennedy again subdued Vause and rehandcuffed him. Kennedy observed that Vause appeared to go wild; and when in that state, Vause did not appear to recognize Kennedy or others whom Vause should have known. According to Kennedy, Vause did not act normal. Kennedy placed Vause in a vehicle and Vause was transported to the emergency room at Tallahassee Memorial Regional Medical Center. Margorie Landers Smith was a Registered Nurse in the emergency room when Vause was brought in on the afternoon of August 30, 1986. She had known Vause when she had worked for the ambulance service in Wakulla County. She took his medical history and charted his vital signs upon admission. Vause appeared to Smith to have been drinking and was in a highly excited state. Dr. Cohen (phonetic), Vause's doctor, arrived and examined Vause and ordered various tests. Upon receiving the results, Dr. Cohen advised Vause to voluntarily admit himself for psychiatric observation. Vause angrily refused and Dr. Cohen told Vause that he, Cohen, would admit Vause involuntarily. Cohen and Smith were both in an examining room in the hospital's emergency room during this confrontation, and Vause refused to let either of them leave the room. Smith talked with Vause and convinced Vause to let Dr. Cohen leave. Vause admitted to Smith that he was drinking too much and had family problems. Vause eventually allowed Smith to leave the examining room. Dr. Cohen called hospital security and a psychiatrist obtained an involuntary admission order for Vause. Eventually, the Tallahassee Police Department was called to remove Vause to the psychiatric center because the hospital security lacked jurisdiction. Vause had rummaged through the medical supplies in the room and found two very large cardiac syringes with barrels approximately four inches long and heavy gauge needles three to four inches long. When Smith returned to the examining room, Vause threatened her with these syringes, holding them up in her face. Smith continued to try and calm Vause, but he was very upset. Vause kept saying he was going to leave and was not going to the psychiatric center. In response to the hospital's call, two female officers from the Tallahassee Police Department (TPD) arrived on the scene and attempted to talk Vause into letting Smith go and going to the psychiatric center. They succeeded in getting Smith free, but he used the syringes to threaten the officers and Smith, who remained and continued to try and work with Vause. The officers requested backup and Officer Peavey, a K-9 officer, arrived at the scene. After attempting to reason with Vause unsuccessfully, Peavy broke the syringes with a night stick and, together with the TPD officers, hospital security officers, orderlies and nurses, subdued Vause, who was handcuffed and transported to the psychiatric center. On the evening of August 30, 1989, Officer Peavy was called back to the hospital psychiatric center where he arrived to find that Vause had broken free of his four-point restraints. He, again, quieted Vause down and the nurses gave Vause additional medication to calm him down. Peavy observed that Vause's behavior was erratic and Vause would shift rapidly from rational and non- aggressive behavior to irrational and aggressive behavior. On September 12, 1986, officers of the WCSD were called to the residence of Ronnie Kilgore by Kilgore's wife. Vause was one of the officers who responded to the call. Donald Crum, formerly a deputy with WCSD and then with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, also responded to this call and saw Vause, whom Crum had formerly known well. Crum was shocked at Vause's appearance and struck up a conversation with him about Vause's problems. Vause had been drinking and acted suicidal. Crum was joined by David Harvey, Sheriff of Wakulla County, and together they left Kilgore's house and returned to the Sheriff's office where they continued to discuss Vause's problems and tried to talk Vause into surrendering his weapons. Vause was very agitated, stated he was afraid of people who were out to get him, and refused to surrender his weapons. Several times during his conversation with Crum and Harvey, Vause pulled his weapon and waived it around before reholstering it. Both Crum and Harvey felt that Vause needed to be disarmed for his own good, but that to do so in the Sheriff's office at that time would be courting disaster. They let Vause leave and put a plan into effect to disarm and subdue Vause away from town in order that uninvolved persons would not get hurt. The Leon County Sheriff's Department (LCSD) Special Weapons and Tactics Team (SWAT) was alerted and deployed around the areas in which it was felt Vause could be arrested that evening because Harvey had concluded it was necessary to arrest Vause for Vause's own safety. On the evening of September 12, 1986, a call was received from Ronnie Kilgore, who reported that Vause was at Kilgore's house; however, when the deputies arrived at Kilgore's house, Vause had left. Vause's vehicle was found wrecked in a water filled drainage ditch, and Vause was arrested at a nearby convenience store and returned to the scene of the automobile wreck. When Vause was disarmed, the officers could not account for all of the weapons which he was known to carry and they felt these weapons were in Vause's truck. When they asked Vause about this, Vause advised them that if they entered his truck, they were liable to get hurt because there was a "bomb" in the truck. Joseph Doyle, the bomb expert for the LCSD SWAT and a friend of Vause, was called to the scene. He did not know that it was Vause's vehicle, but he was told that there was possibly an explosive device in the truck and weapons which the WCSD wished to secure. Doyle entered the truck, which was two-thirds full of water, and found several firearms and a one pound can of black powder with a M-120 hand grenade fuse screwed into the top of it. The pin was in place in the fuse and the device was wet. Doyle had worked with Vause on many occasions and had instructed Vause on explosive devices. In Doyle's opinion, the device which he removed from Vause's truck was not as dangerous a device as Vause was capable of making, even with essentially the same materials. Doyle felt the device he had found was probably designed as a signalling device to alert one of the approach of others. Subsequently, Vause was charged with several felonies; however, he plead guilty only to several misdemeanors, receiving two years probation. One of the conditions of this probation was that Vause not drink alcoholic beverages. Vause admits violating this condition of his probation on November 29, 1988 but asserts that he has not violated the condition since that time. For violation of that condition, Vause was sentenced to eight months in the county jail which he has finished serving. Vause admits that he is an alcoholic. He attends meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous and has completed a drug rehabilitation program. Vause has no independent recollection of the events of August 30 and September 12, 1986. Vause feels that his service as a patrol officer contributed to his personal problems and does not desire to return to those duties. He felt that his experience could be put to use as a corrections officer or bailiff. All of the sworn officers who knew Vause praised his service and professionalism prior to the events of August and September 1986. Many of them indicated a willingness to serve with Vause if he had received treatment, was well, and had demonstrated his rehabilitation. Vause experienced a psychotic episode during the period August 30, 1986 and September 12, 1986, during which he was irrational, suffered from violent mood shifts, and exhibited aggressive and suicidal behavior. He was hospitalized during a portion of this period for assessment of his mental competence. No evidence was presented by either party concerning the findings of Vause's admission to determine Vause's competency. However, based upon the testimony of those who observed the Respondent during this period, the Respondent Roxie E. Vause is found to have been psychotic during the period from August 30 to September 12, 1986 to such an extent that he could not form the requisite intent to commit a criminal act.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Commission reactivate the Respondent's certification upon the following conditions: The Respondent complete all required training and education; The Respondent be placed upon a two-year probation, during which time he shall comply with the following conditions: The Respondent advise any employer or potential employer that he is a recovering alcoholic; The Respondent regularly attend meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous for 24 months and present evidence of attendance to his supervisors upon request; The Respondent, if medically possible, take medications for 24 months which cause violent intestinal upset if alcohol is ingested; The Respondent attend any additional counseling, treatment, or instruction which the Commission or his employer may require for 24 months to include his appearance as a speaker or participant; and The Respondent submit all performance evaluations by his employer on his performance to the Commission during his probation. The Respondent's certificate may be revoked or this probation may be extended by the Commission for violation of the terms of this probation. DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of December, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN 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 18th day of May, 1989. COPIES FURNISHED: Joseph S. White, Esq. Florida Department of Law Enforcement P.O. Box 1489 Tallahassee, FL 32302 Harold S. Richmond, Esq. P.O. Box 695 Quincy, FL 32351 Jeffrey Long, Director Criminal Justice Standards Training Commission P.O. Box 1489 Tallahassee, FL 32302 James T. Moore, Commissioner Florida Department of Law Enforcement Box 1489 Tallahassee, FL 32302 =================================================================
