The Issue Whether or not the Respondent, William A. Mannilla, Jr., should have his real estate salesman's license suspended for the alleged adjudication of guilt in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on the offense of importing a Schedule II controlled substance, cocaine, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 846, which is allegedly a crime of moral turpitude, fraudulent or dishonest dealing in violation of 475.25(1)(e), F. S. Whether of not the Respondent, William A. Mannilla, Jr., should have his real estate salesman's license revoked for allegedly being committed to the custody of the Attorney General of the United States of his authorized representative, for imprisonment beginning on or about June 29, 1976, which allegedly is a violation of 475.25(2), F.S.
Findings Of Fact Beginning July 12, 1974 and continuing through September 30, 1976, the Respondent, William A. Mannilla, Jr., was a holder of a real estate salesman's license, certificate no. 0136035, held with the State of Florida, Department of professional and Occupational Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission. On June 8, 1976 the Respondent, appeared before the United States District Court, for the Southern District of Florida, and entered a plea of guilty and was convicted of the offense of importing a controlled substance, a Schedule II, controlled substance, cocaine, in violation of Title 21, U.S.C. Section 846. The sentence was imposed against the Respondent in the name of William Anthony Mannilla. It was further adjudicated that the Respondent be committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his authorized representative for treatment and supervision pursuant to the Federal Youth Corrections Act, Title 18, U.S.C., Chapter 402, Section 5010(b) as made applicable by the Young Adult Offender provisions of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 4216, until discharged by the Youth Correction Division as provided in Section 5017(c) of the aforementioned Chapter. The sentence of confinement began on June 29, 1976 when the Respondent reported to the Federal Correction Institution, Tallahassee, Florida. Subsequently, the Respondent was confined under the sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution, 15801 Southwest 137th Avenue, South Miami, Florida, and was so confined on the date of the hearing.
Recommendation Based upon the conclusions of law, it is recommended that the license of William A. Mannilla, Jr., a/k/a William Anthony Mannilla, as a real estate salesman, certificate no. 0136035 held with the State of Florida, Department of professional and Occupational Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission, be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of April, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Bruce Kamelhair, Esquire Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road Winter Park, Florida 32789 Collin Guy, Esquire 12700 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 410 North Miami, Florida 33181 William A. Mannilla, Jr. c/o Warden W. J. Kenney Federal Correctional Institution 15801 Southwest 137th Avenue Miami, Florida 33177
The Issue Whether Respondent obtained her real estate license by means of misrepresentation or concealment, by failing to disclose that she had pled guilty to a felony, in violation of Section 475.25(1)(m), Florida Statutes, and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner is a state licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute administrative complaints, pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida, particularly Chapters 455 and 475, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 61J2, Florida Administrative Code. Respondent is and was a duly licensed real estate salesperson in the State of Florida at all times material to the Administrative Complaint in this action. Respondent was arrested on September 12, 1980, on a felony charge. On August 24, 1981, Respondent pled guilty to "possession of quaaludes less than 200 grams," in Circuit Court of Orange County, Florida. Adjudication of guilt was withheld by the court and Respondent was placed on probation for a period of five years. Respondent successfully completed probation, which was terminated after three years. Respondent has not been arrested or convicted on any other criminal charge since 1980. By licensure application, signed by Respondent on January 13, 1996, Respondent applied to become licensed as a real estate salesperson in the State of Florida. At the time Respondent made application for her real estate license, Respondent was asked to indicate whether or not she had "ever been convicted of a crime, found guilty, or entered a plea of nolo contendere (no contest), even if adjudication was withheld. This question applies to any violation of the laws of any municipality, county, state, or nation, including traffic offenses . . . without regard to whether you were placed on probation, had adjudication withheld, paroled or pardoned." In response to this question, Respondent checked the "No" box. In the "Instructions" section of the Application, applicants are plainly advised to "Fill out carefully." Respondent swore that all answers and information contained in her application were true and correct and complete. Respondent's signature was duly notarized. The Respondent's defense to the charge is that she thought the matter had been expunged. The Respondent stated that she personally took no action to expunge the matter. Instead, the Respondent's belief that the matter had been expunged is based upon events surrounding the Respondent's application for a liquor license in 1987. On the application, Respondent acknowledged her arrest in 1980. Upon investigation of Respondent's criminal record by the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, the investigator indicated that one charge was dismissed and adjudication of guilt was withheld on a September 12, 1980, arrest. Respondent's application for a liquor license was approved. Based on this belief, the Respondent believed that the matter had been expunged, sealed, or nolle prossed. Although Respondent made a careless misrepresentation in her answer to Question 9, Respondent's explanation of the basis for her answer is credible.
Recommendation Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent be found guilty of having violated Section 475.25(1)(m), Florida Statutes, as charged in the Administrative Complaint. It is further RECOMMENDED that Respondent's real estate license be suspended for one year and Respondent pay an administrative fine of $500.00, plus the costs of prosecution of this matter. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of April, 1998, at Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE 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 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of April, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: Steven D. Fieldman, Chief Attorney Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street, Suite N-308 Orlando, Florida 32801 Judith Milsaps, pro se 4408 Thistle Berry Drive Melbourne, Florida 32935 Lynda L. Goodgame General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792 Henry M. Solares, Division Director Division of Real Estate Department of Business and Professional Regulation Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802-1900
The Issue The issue presented by this case concerns the question of whether the Respondent, State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services has exhausted all treatment for the Petitioner, John P. Wordsman, III, through available sex offender programs administered by the Respondent. See Section 917.20, Florida Statutes (1977).
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner submitted a "Petition for Administrative Determination" to the State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. In turn, the Department requested the Division of Administrative Hearings to conduct a formal hearing to consider the matters set forth in the petition and this request was received by the Division of Administrative Hearings on January 13, 1981. A final hearing in this cause was scheduled for January 30, 1981, but was not conducted until March 3, 1981, to allow Petitioner to secure representation. In the course of the final hearing the Petitioner testified in his own behalf. The Respondent called as witnesses Lois P. Stevens, Staff Psychologist in the forensic service at the Florida State Hospital and Robert H. Alcorn, Jr., Director of the Mentally Disordered Sex Offender Program at the Florida State Hospital. Petitioner had two exhibits admitted. Respondent's Exhibit No. 1 was admitted into evidence. At all times pertinent to this proceeding, the Petitioner has been in the custody of the Respondent in keeping with the order of the Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida, and the authority of Chapter 917, Florida Statutes (1977). Beginning July 28, 1978, through the present, Petitioner has resided in the Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee, Florida, where he is undergoing treatment in a hospital program for the benefit of mentally disordered sex offenders. This program and similar programs in other institutions administered by the Respondent require a high degree of motivation on the part of the patient in order to achieve success. Although the Petitioner has made progress in the course of his stay, the Respondent has made a preliminary determination that it has exhausted all appropriate treatment for the Petitioner through the program in which he is enrolled and has additionally concluded that similar programs within the State of Florida do not offer other opportunities for progress. In that respect, the Respondent has exhausted treatment in the affiliated programs. The principal treatment modality in the mentally disordered sex offender program at Florida State Hospital is group therapy. The Petitioner has participated in the group therapy sessions during his current hospitalization but no significant change in his behavior has been observed during this period. His condition has been diagnosed as (1) sexual deviation, pedophilia, (2) homosexuality, and (3) alcoholism. The petitioner has been placed with the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services following a plea or nolo contendere to the offense of sexual battery, involving an attempted rape. Referring again to the Petitioner's participation in the principal treatment modality, i.e., group therapy, Petitioner has worked in a group headed by a male psychologist, staff worker and subsequently, a group with a female staff worker. The change to the female staff worker was to assist the Petitioner in dealing with his relationship with females. His attitude toward females has been described as Victorian in that he had problems relating to women who fulfilled roles other than child bearing. Through the group discussions, the Petitioner has talked about his preference for homosexual life style and his problem with alcoholism. Wordsman has not discussed his problems with pedophilia. In the group sessions, his "feedback" under discussion of his life's circumstance is confusing and his motivation in those sessions is not genuine. In this connection, the Petitioner's attitude has been described as one of playing "head games," especially with his principal advisor and therapist, Lois Stevens. This attitude in essence means the Petitioner has feigned sincere participation. His explanation for this tactic is to the effect that he wanted the treatment but that he did not feel that he was up to the occasion of sincerely applying for it. The Petitioner does not wish to engage in specific topics in the group therapy sessions and is distrustful of people, to the extent that he would not confide in others. When pressed to give specific responses during the course of the group therapy sessions, the petitioner becomes stressful and will not give answers to the questions posed. The form of treatment in the sex offender program requires honesty in the responses of the participants and the Petitioner has difficulty complying with this standard. In the course of the group sessions and in dealing with the subject of his crime, the Petitioner would not give specific responses other than to say that he remembers events around the time period of the act; however, he indicates that he may have been on alcohol when it occurred. The only brief progress that the Petitioner has shown in relating to his problems in the group therapy sessions occurred immediately after he had been told that the staff was recommending his return to the committing court. At that juncture, he became more sincere in the first session, but immediately reverted back to a superficial and shallow manner of dealing with the treatment form. The Petitioner has been involved in other therapy activities to include music, leather and wood therapy, a program for alcoholics, and occupational therapy. Petitioner is an accomplished musician and has performed well in that form of therapy and in addition has made notable progress in occupational therapy. Notwithstanding the progress in these therapy areas, his failure to make satisfactory progress in the group therapy sessions, which sessions are the primary agent for change in the underlying condition of the patient, has lead the hospital staff to the conclusion that it has exhausted treatment of those conditions. Continued success in the other related therapy does not have a significant effect in alleviating his condition. This opinion is expressed in the most recent staffing summary of December 10, 1980, a copy of which has been admitted as Respondent's Exhibit No. 1. In addition to the staffing achieved by Florida State an interdepartmental screening was conducted of the Petitioner's condition and the question of exhaustion of treatment in the sex offender programs and it was the opinion of the unit directors of the sex offender programs within the Respondent Department's organization that the overall Department had exhausted treatment for the Petitioner in the sex offender programs. It is the opinion of the Department that the Petitioner continues to meet the definitions of sex offender within the meaning of Chapter 917, Florida Statutes. Wordsman feels that he has made progress in dealing with people around him and that he gets along better than he did before his commitment to the program. He has expressed concern that the staff is "out to get him" and that the group therapy sessions are not adequate to deal with his problem. He prefers to be placed in a program for behavior disorders with specific emphasis on drug abuse, in that he feels his problems arise when he becomes intoxicated. His reaction to the current program In which he is placed is summed up by his remark that he does net "understand what the staff wants from him."
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby, RECOMMENDED: That a final order be entered by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services finding that it has exhausted all appropriate treatment for John P. Wordsman, III, and that said John P. Wordsman, III, be returned to the committing court for further disposition. DONE and ENTERED this 19th day of March, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of March, 1981 COPIES FURNISHED: Gerry L. Clark, Esquire Florida State Hospital Chattahoochee, Florida 32324 J. Craig Williams, Esquire 335 East Bay Street Jacksonville, Florida 32201
Findings Of Fact Based upon the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the Final Hearing and the entire record in this proceeding, the following findings of fact are made: On March 3, 1994 Petitioner submitted to the Department an application for licensure as a Limited Surety Agent (Bail Bondsman). In a Denial Letter dated July 20, 1994, the Department notified Petitioner that his application for licensure was denied. The basis for the Department's denial of Petitioner's application was Petitioner's past felony convictions. The evidence established that on or about December 4, 1980, Petitioner was charged in the Circuit Court for the Twelfth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Case Number 80-105 (the "First State Case"), with trafficking in illegal drugs and the use of a firearm during the commission of a felony in violation of Sections 893.135 and 790.07, Florida Statutes. On June 5, 1981, Petitioner pled no contest in the First State Case to trafficking in excess of two thousand (2,000) pounds, but less than ten thousand (10,000) pounds of cannabis. Petitioner was fined and placed on probation for ten (10) years. On or about June 14, 1981, Petitioner was charged in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Case Numbers 83-6033-CR-EPS and 83-6038-CR-NCR (the "Federal Cases"), with five felony counts of possession with intent to distribute illegal drugs and conspiracy to import illegal drugs into the United States of America, in violation of Title 21, Sections 841(a)(1), 846, 952(a), 960(a), 963, and 843(b), United States Code. On or about November 5, 1981, Petitioner was charged in the Circuit Court for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Case Number 81-1191 CFG (the "Second State Case") with violation of the Florida Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organization Act ("RICO"), Section 943.462, Florida Statutes. Although the exact timing is not clear, at some point after his arrest, Petitioner began cooperating with authorities which led to plea bargains and a sentence which did not include any jail time. On April 4, 1984, Petitioner pled guilty to one count in each of the Federal Cases to attempt and conspiracy to import marijuana and methaqualaudes into the United States of America. As a result of his plea in the Federal Cases, Petitioner was fined and placed on 5 years probation. On April 6, 1984, Petitioner pled guilty in the Second State Case, was fined $7,500.00 and placed on probation for fifteen (15) years. This plea was negotiated as part of the plea in the Federal Cases. Petitioner's probation from the First State Case was terminated May 20, 1988. Petitioner's probation from the Federal Cases was terminated on April 21, 1989 and September 11, 1989. Petitioner's civil rights were restored pursuant to Executive Orders of the Office of Executive Clemency dated May 19, 1989 and May 23, 1990. It is not clear from the record if the Executive Orders constitute a "full pardon" as suggested by counsel for Petitioner at the hearing in this matter. Petitioner down plays his role in the elaborate criminal scheme that led to his arrests and convictions. He suggests that all of the charges were related to the same scheme. Insufficient evidence was presented to reach any conclusions regarding the underlying criminal activity and/or Petitioner's exact involvement. Petitioner has been very active in community affairs since his convictions. He has apparently been a good family man and claims to have rehabilitated himself. Subsequent to his conviction, Petitioner and three other investors started a bail bond business. Petitioner claims he did not play an active role in the business. However, when the Department learned of his involvement, it required Petitioner to terminate any affiliation with the company. Petitioner's wife currently owns a bail bond company. Petitioner operates a "court services" business out of the same building where his wife's bail bond business operates. No evidence was presented of any improper involvement by Petitioner in his wife's business.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that the Department of Insurance and Treasurer enter a Final Order denying Petitioner's application for licensure as a Limited Surety Agent. DONE AND RECOMMENDED this 2nd day of August, 1995, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. J. STEPHEN MENTON 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 2nd day of August, 1995. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 94-4893 Rulings on the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner: Subordinate to findings of fact 4 through 10. Subordinate to findings of fact 13. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in substance in findings of fact 1. Adopted in substance in findings of fact 2. Adopted in the Preliminary Statement. Rejected as vague and unnecessary. Subordinate to findings of fact 14 and 15. Subordinate to findings of fact 14 and 15. Rulings on the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Respondent: Adopted in substance in findings of fact 1. Adopted in substance in findings of fact 2. Adopted in substance in findings of fact 2 through 10. Subordinate to findings of fact 14. Rejected as argumentative and unnecessary. COPIES FURNISHED: Bill Nelson State Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, FL 32399-0300 Dan Sumner Acting General Counsel Department of Insurance The Capitol, PL-11 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Julio Gutierrez, Esq. 2225 Coral Way Miami, FL 33145 Allen R. Moayad, Esq. Florida Department of Insurance and Treasurer 612 Larson Building 200 E. Gaines Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0300
The Issue At issue is whether Respondent's Florida real estate license should be disciplined upon charges that: (1) Respondent is guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses, dishonest dealing by trick, scheme or device, culpable negligence, or breach of trust in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.25(1)(b), Florida Statutes, as set forth in Count I of the Administrative Complaint; and (2) Respondent is guilty of having had a registration suspended, revoked, or otherwise acted against in any jurisdiction in violation of Section 475.225(1)(s), Florida Statutes, as set forth in Count II of the Administrative Complaint.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner is the state licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute administrative complaints pursuant to Chapters 455, and 475, Florida Statutes. Respondent, Washington Moises Quinones, is and was at all times material to the Administrative Complaint a licensed Florida real estate salesperson, issued license number 0650737 in accordance with Chapter 475, Florida Statutes. Respondent, Washington Moises Quinones, was also a member of the Florida Bar. On or about August 29, 1997, the Florida Bar petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for an emergency suspension of Respondent's bar license. The petition filed with the Florida Supreme Court reflects that Respondent's "trust records reveal losses which approximate $350,000.00." On or about September 11, 1997, the Florida Supreme Court granted the petition for emergency suspension of Respondent's bar license, and suspended Respondent from the practice of law for the reasons set forth in the Petition.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent be found guilty of violation Section 475.25(1)(b), Florida Statutes, and 475.25(1)(s), Florida Statutes, as charged in the Administrative Complaint, and that Respondent's real estate license be revoked in accordance with Section 475.25(1), Florida Statutes. DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of December, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. RICHARD A. HIXSON 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 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 8th day of December, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: Ghunise Coaxum, Senior Attorney Department of Business and Professional Regulation 400 West Robinson Street, Suite N-308 Orlando, Florida 32801 Washington Moises Quinones 5119 Agora Street Sebring, Florida 33872 James Kimbler, Acting Division Director Division of Real Estate Department of Business and Professional Regulation Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802-1900 Lynda L. Goodgame, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792
The Issue Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint, as amended, and, if so, what penalties should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Based upon the evidence adduced at the final hearing and the record as a whole, the following findings of fact are made: Respondent is now, and has been since June 5, 1986, a Florida-licensed clinical social worker, holding license number SW1666. S. G. became a patient of Respondent's in the fall of 1992, when she was experiencing marital difficulties. Her then husband, from whom she was separated, was already a patient of Respondent's. Pursuant to Respondent's suggestion, S. G. saw Respondent as a patient once a week. S. G. and her husband met with Respondent both as a couple and separately. At first, during his sessions with S. G., when they were alone, Respondent's demeanor was "pretty professional"; however, as time passed, "boundaries were crossed." Respondent began to talk to S. G. about his personal life. For example, he told her about the extramarital affairs he had had, claiming that these instances of infidelity had occurred "when he was highly stressed." After making this claim, he added that he "had been very, very stressed lately." In or about late April of 1993, when S. G. was still a patient of his, Respondent telephoned S. G.'s residence and asked S. G.'s son, who had answered the telephone, if he could speak with S. G. S. G.'s son thereupon handed S. G. the telephone and S. G. began conversing with Respondent. During their conversation, Respondent told S. G. that he "wanted to engage in phone sex." When S. G. declined to participate in such activity, Respondent asked her to visit him that evening at his office, which she agreed to do. As promised, that evening, after dark, S. G. went to Respondent's office. When she arrived, at around 8:00 or 9:00 p.m., Respondent was in his office seeing another patient. S. G. remained in the waiting area outside Respondent's office until the other patient left and Respondent came out and invited her to return with him to his office. Upon entering the office, S. G. sat down in a chair. Respondent thereupon took off his tie and asked S. G. if she trusted him, to which S. G. replied, "Yes." Respondent then tied S. G.'s hands behind her back with his tie. The two wound up on the floor together, where they engaged in sexual intercourse. They were interrupted by the ringing of the telephone in the waiting area. Respondent left the office to answer the telephone. He joked that it was probably his wife "wondering where he was." When he returned to the office, Respondent tossed S. G. a few tissues to use to clean herself off. He then asked S. G. (whose car was parked in front of the building in which Respondent's office was located) to drive him to his car (that was parked behind the building), which she did. They both then went their separate ways. S. G. was "very upset" following this encounter. Respondent telephoned her the following morning and told her he needed to see her. He met her later that day at a delicatessen. When S. G. ordered only a cup of coffee, Respondent told her that she was a "cheap date." During their conversation in the delicatessen, Respondent told S. G. that what had happened the night before "had to remain between the two of [them] and no one else could know." On a subsequent occasion, approximately a month or so later, in or about early June of 1993, when she was still a patient of Respondent's, S. G. had another encounter with Respondent in which the two of them engaged in sexual activity. This meeting took place in the evening, at approximately 9:00 or 10:00 p.m., in S. G.'s vehicle, which was parked near a "video store" from which Respondent had rented "some videos" that he needed to return. After returning the "videos," Respondent joined S. G. in her vehicle. Upon entering the vehicle, he commented "about how [S. G.] looked." The two then engaged in oral sex, after which Respondent stated that "somebody's wife wasn't going to get any that night." Following this second instance of sexual activity between Respondent and S. G., S. G. began to feel that she was "being taken advantage of, manipulated, and betrayed" by Respondent. She therefore stopped seeing him. In addition, she filed a civil action against Respondent and gave a statement to the police concerning her relationship and activities with Respondent. At the time of the final hearing in this case, S. G.'s civil action against Respondent had been settled and S. G. had received from Respondent the money he had agreed (as part of the settlement) to pay her. S. G.'s statement to the police led to criminal charges being filed against Respondent in Broward County Circuit Court Case No. 94-17857CF. Respondent was initially charged with three counts of sexual conduct by a psychotherapist, in violation of Section 491.0112, Florida Statutes, 3/ to which he pled not guilty. Pursuant to a "plea bargain," the charges were reduced to three counts of simple (misdemeanor) battery, to which Respondent pled guilty "in [his] best interest." 4/ Respondent was adjudicated guilty and, as to each count, placed on consecutive one-year terms of probation. The following is an excerpt from the transcript of the proceeding at which Respondent entered his guilty plea to these reduced charges: THE COURT: Is there a stipulation to the factual basis of the plea? MR. DUTKO [Defense Counsel]: Yes[] sir[,] as to the offense of battery. THE COURT: Okay. What facts would the State bring forth if the case went to trial? MR. SHANE [Prosecutor): The State would allege that on or about the 27th day of April, 1993, on two separate occasions, at two separate times and locations, the defendant did unlawfully touch or strike [S. G.] without her permission. With respect to Count III, as amended in the information, on or about the 1st day of June, 1993, the defendant did touch or strike [S. G.] without [her] permission or consent. THE COURT: Court finds that the defendant received advice of competent counsel with whom he is satisfied[;] [t]hat he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived the constitutional rights contained in the plea form[;] and [that] he freely entered into this plea agreement. The Court finds the defendant competent. There's a factual basis and the Court hereby accepts [the change] of plea and makes the agreement to enter the plea and waiver of rights an exhibit for the purpose of the court file. Any reason why sentence should not be imposed? MR. DUTKO: No, sir. THE COURT: As to case 94-17857 as far as amended Court adjudicates the defendant guilty of Count I, II and III, which has been amended to Misdemeanor Battery. The defendant is placed on one year probation on each count. All counts are to run consecutive[ly], rather than concurrent[ly], with the following special conditions[:] $143.00 court cost[s], and that's to be paid at minimum equal monthly increments over the period of probation; [r]andom urinalysis to determine the presence of a controlled substance[;] [t]wo hundred hours of community service, and that may be performed at any nonprofit entity at a minimum and equal monthly increments over the period of his three years of probation[;] [n]o contact directly or indirectly with [S. G.], her family or her place of business[;] [t]hat the defendant may travel for business purposes within Dade, Broward and Palm Beach[;] [t]he defendant is permitted to go to Orlando, during the periods that have been set forth[;] [a]nd the Court has no objection to the defendant, at some future date, . . . com[ing] in and request[ing] further travel once the Department has been given an opportunity to be heard. Is that [the] sum and substance of the agreement? MR. DUTKO: It is Your Honor.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Board enter a final order finding Respondent guilty of the violations of Section 491.009(2)(c), (k), (q), and (s), Florida Statutes, described above and disciplining him for having committed these violations by fining him $2,000.00, suspending his license for a period of six months, and placing him on probation for a period of one year commencing immediately following the conclusion of the period of his suspension. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of July, 2000, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STUART M. LERNER Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of July, 2000.
Findings Of Fact The Respondent holds Real Estate Salesman's License No. 0355517 issued by the Board of Real Estate. Petitioner is employed as a real estate salesman at Norma Star Realty, Key Largo, Florida. During October, 1980, the Respondent applied for licensure as a real estate salesman with the Board of Real Estate. His application was approved, and the Respondent was admitted to the examination, which he passed. The Board of Real Estate issued a real estate salesman's license to the Respondent during December, 1980. In applying for licensure, the Respondent filled out the Board of Real Estate's standard application form. Paragraph 6 of the form sets out the following inquiry: Have you ever been arrested for, or charged with, the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation including traffic offenses (but not parking, speeding, inspection or traffic signal violations) without regard to whether convicted, sentenced, pardoned or paroled? The Respondent answered "No" to this inquiry. The Respondent has been arrested on several occasions. On July 29, 1964, he was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, on a charge of sodomy. On August 6, 1964, he was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, on a charge of rape. On May 22, 1966, he was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, on the charge of notorious cohabitation. On January 31, 1969, he was arrested in Miami, Florida, on the charge of board bill fraud. All of these charges were ultimately dismissed. The Respondent was neither tried nor convicted in connection with any of the charges. The Respondent had been licensed as a real estate salesman in the State of Michigan. While in Michigan, he retained counsel, now deceased, who advised him that all of the Las Vegas arrests had been expunged from the Respondent's record, and that the Respondent could respond in the negative to inquiries as to whether he had ever been arrested.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, hereby RECOMMENDED: That a final order be entered by the Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Real Estate, dismissing the Administrative Complaint filed against the Respondent, Michael Timothy McKee. RECOMMENDED this 10th day of December, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida. G. STEVEN PFEIFFER Assistant Director Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of December, 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: Harold W. Braxton, Esquire 45 S.W. 36th Court Miami, Florida 33135 Arthur L. Miller, Esquire 9101 S.W. 66th Terrace Miami, Florida 33173 Mr. Samuel R. Shorstein Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Frederick H. Wilsen, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Carlos B. Stafford Executive Director Board of Real Estate Department of Professional Regulation Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802
Findings Of Fact Respondent is and has been at all times material hereto a licensed veterinarian in the State of Florida, having been issued license number VM 0001124. Respondent was a licensed veterinarian in the State of New York, having been issued license number 772918-0 or 002193. On March 27, 1978, Respondent pled not guilty to an eleven-count indictment filed against him in the County Court for Nassau County, New York. He was found guilty and convicted after a jury trial of two counts of Fraudulent Entries and Practices in Contests of Speed involving a race horse running under an assumed name. On November 3, 1978, he was fined $1,000.00 and sentenced to one year's imprisonment at the Nassau County Correctional Center. The New York State Education Department, Office of Professional Discipline, State Board for Veterinary Medicine, is the agency of that state charged with regulating the practice of veterinary medicine in the State of New York. That agency initiated disciplinary proceedings against Respondent charging him with having violated Education Law Section 6509(5)(a), which prohibits being convicted of committing an act constituting a crime under New York State law. Although a hearing on that charge was available to Respondent, Respondent voluntarily chose to waive his right to a hearing and surrender his license. On May 5, 1982, Respondent signed his sworn Application to Surrender License. In that sworn application, Respondent stated that he admitted guilt to the charges against him, that he understood the Board of Regents (of the State Education Department) had discretion whether or not to accept Respondent's application to surrender his license on the terms and conditions proposed by Respondent and that such applications were not automatically granted, and that he would agree to an order accepting his application for surrender with the provision that he not apply for restoration of his license for at least one year. On June 25, 1982, the Board of Regents voted to grant Respondent's application for permission to surrender his license on the terms proposed by him. Pursuant to that vote, on June 28, 1982, the Commissioner of Education of the State of New York entered an Order granting Respondent's application to surrender his license, cancelling Respondent's registration to practice, and prohibiting Respondent from applying for restoration of his license for at least one year. On October 15, 1982, the Probable Cause Panel of the Florida Board of Veterinary Medicine determined probable cause, and an Administrative Complaint was filed against Respondent. On October 5, 1983, the Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings assigned to conduct the formal proceedings against Respondent in that case dismissed the Amended Administrative Complaint in that case due to alleged defects in the probable cause determination. On December 2, 1983, the Probable Cause Panel determined probable cause a second time, an Administrative Complaint was filed, and this proceeding ensued.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered finding Respondent guilty of the allegations contained in the Administrative Complaint filed against him, imposing an administrative fine in the amount of one thousand dollars against him to be paid to the Executive Director of the Board of Veterinary Medicine within thirty days of entry of the Final Order, and placing Respondent on probation for a period of two years. DONE and ORDERED this 4th day of January, 1985, in Tallahassee, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT 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 4th day of January, 1985. COPIES FURNISHED: James Gi1lis and William Furlow, Esquires Department of Professional Regulation 130 N. Monroe Street Tallahassee, Fl. 32301 Paul Lambert, Esquire 1114 E. Park Avenue Tallahassee, Fl. 32301 Fred Roche Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 N. Monroe St. Tallahassee, Fl. 32301 Jane Raker Executive Director Board of Veterinary Medicine 130 N. Monroe St. Tallahassee, Fl. 32301
The Issue The issues in this case are whether Respondent was adjudicated guilty of a crime which directly relates to the practice of contracting or the ability to practice contracting, or failed to report his guilty plea to a crime in writing to the Construction Industry Licensing Board within 30 days, in violation of sections 489.129(1)(b) and 455.227(1)(t), Florida Statutes,1/ as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what is the appropriate sanction.
Findings Of Fact The Department is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of contracting pursuant to section 20.165 and chapters 455 and 489, Florida Statutes. The Board is charged with final agency action with respect to contractors pursuant to chapter 489. The practice of contracting is regulated by the State of Florida in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare. Mr. Walk is licensed as a certified residential contractor in the State of Florida, having been issued license number CRC 1327370. He was subject to regulation by the Department at the time of the actions alleged in the Administrative Complaint. Mr. Walk's license allows him to construct, remodel, repair, or make improvements to one-family, two-family, or three- family residences. Such residential structures may reasonably be expected to have children residing in them. A state-licensed residential contractor is trusted by homeowners, allowed into their homes, and into contact with their children. On March 15, 2016, Mr. Walk pled guilty to three counts of possession, control, or intentionally viewing a sexual performance by a child in Case Number 2015CF009085AMB in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. As Mr. Walk testified at hearing, he did not know any of the people in the photographs, he did not take any of the pictures. He "clicked" on child pornography pictures and dragged them into his computer file. The crimes to which Mr. Walk pled guilty affect the public health, safety, and welfare, and directly relate to the practice of contracting or the ability to practice residential contracting. Mr. Walk testified that at the time he signed the guilty plea, he had not seen his son in six months, his attorney at the time did not explain much to him, and the details of the plea agreement were still being worked out. He testified that his main goal was to go home to be with his son. Mr. Walk testified that later, through discussions with his wife and a new attorney, he considered withdrawing his guilty plea, but ultimately he did not do so. On or about November 18, 2016, Mr. Walk was adjudicated guilty of three counts of possession, control, or intentionally viewing a sexual performance by a child in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. On or about December 19, 2016, Mr. Walk reported his guilty plea to three counts of possession, control, or intentionally viewing a sexual performance by a child to Petitioner via a Criminal Self-Reporting Document. On or about December 27, 2016, Petitioner received Mr. Walk's Criminal Self•Reporting Document. An Order of Sex Offender Probation was issued against Mr. Walk in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, on or about February 3, 2017. Mr. Walk was required to register as a sex offender. As a result of Mr. Walk's conviction, he served 18 months in state prison. He is currently serving ten years of sex offender probation and attending sex offender therapy once a week. He must wear a GPS monitor at all times, must keep a log whenever he drives a vehicle, and must pay $23,226.50 for his supervision and other financial obligations.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Construction Industry Licensing Board enter a final order finding Christopher Michael Walk in violation of section 489.129(1)(b), Florida Statutes, and revoking his license as a certified residential contractor. DONE AND ENTERED this 18th day of October, 2018, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S F. SCOTT BOYD 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 18th day of October, 2018.
Findings Of Fact Respondent David A. Avant, III, was arrested on October 16, 1989, and charged with one count of cultivation of marijuana (a third degree felony), and one count of possession of marijuana (a misdemeanor). The charges concerned one marijuana plant which was found on Avant's property by a game warden. Avant was arrested when he picked up the plant to throw it over his fence. The marijuana plant did not belong to Avant and it was not on his property with his permission. A search of Avant's truck by game wardens did not reveal any tools, buckets, etc., indicating that he was, in fact, cultivating and/or caring for the marijuana plant. Avant accepted a plea agreement offered by the State Attorney to save the money and expenses that would be required for a trial. Avant accepted the state attorney's plea agreement for reasons of economics and convenience. Avant entered a plea of nolo contedere to one felony count of cultivation of marijuana and one misdemeanor count of possession of marijuana. 1/
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered dismissing the Amended Administrative Complaint. DONE AND ENTERED this 24th day of June, 1991, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DON W. DAVIS 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 24th day of June, 1991.
