STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA



STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

COUNTY OF COLUMBUS 02 DOJ 1926

______________________________________________________________________________

LAURA DAWN WATTS )

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) PROPOSAL FOR DECISION

)

NORTH CAROLINA SHERIFF’S )

EDUCATION AND TRAINING )

STANDARDS COMMISSION, )

Respondent )

______________________________________________________________________________

On March 13, 2003, Administrative Law Judge Melissa Owens Lassiter heard this contested case in Carolina Beach, North Carolina. This case was heard after Respondent requested, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-40(e), designation of an Administrative Law Judge to preside at the hearing of a contested case under Article 3A, Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes. On May 16, 2003, Respondent filed a proposed Proposal for Decision.

APPEARANCES

Petitioner: Laura Dawn Watts, Pro Se

602 Elbow Road

Hallsboro, NC 28442

Respondent: John J. Aldridge III

Department of Justice

Law Enforcement Liaison Section

P.O. Box 629

Raleigh, N.C. 27602-0629

ISSUES

Whether the Respondent’s proposed denial of Petitioner’s application for certification as a Justice Officer is supported by substantial evidence?

FINDINGS OF FACT

STIPULATED FACTS

1. Both parties are properly before this Administrative Law Judge in that jurisdiction and venue are proper, both parties received notice of hearing, and the Petitioner received the Notification of Probable Cause to Revoke Certification letter mailed by the Respondent on September 30, 2002.

2. The North Carolina Sheriff’s Education and Training Standards Commission has the authority granted under Chapter 17E of the North Carolina General Statutes and Title 12 of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 10, to certify justice officers and to revoke, suspend, or deny such certification.

3. A charge of a Simple Worthless Check, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-107(d)(1) was brought in Columbus County District Court. This charge was voluntarily dismissed by the state and the check was paid.

4. On October 20, 1997, Petitioner entered a plea of guilty by waiver to the Class A Misdemeanor of a Simple Worthless Check, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-107(d)(1) in Columbus County District Court. Petitioner was forced to pay $80.00 in fines and costs and $42.96 in restitution to the “Medicine Shoppe”.

5. On February 12, 1996, Petitioner entered a plea of guilty by waiver to the Class A Misdemeanor of a Simple Worthless Check, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. §14-107(d)(1) in Columbus County District Court. Petitioner was forced to pay $60.00 in fines and costs and $33.83 in restitution.

6. 12 NCAC 10B .0204(c)(1) and (2) provide, in pertinent part, that:

(C) The Commission may revoke, suspend, or deny the certification of a justice officer when the Commission finds that the applicant for certification or the certified officer:

(1) has knowingly made a material misrepresentation of any information required for certification or accreditation from the Commission or the North Carolina Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards Commission: or

(2) has knowingly and designedly by any means of false pretense, deception, defraud, misrepresentation or cheating whatsoever, obtained or attempted to obtain credit, training or certification from the Commission or the North Carolina Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards Commission.

7. 12 NCAC 10B .0205 provides that “when the Commission suspends, revokes or denies the certification of a justice officer, the period of sanction shall be:

(2) not less than five years where the cause of sanction is:

(a) commission or conviction of offenses as specified in 12 NCAC 10B .0204(d)(1) and (4);”

8. 2 NCAC 10B .0301(a) provides that “Every justice officer employed or certified in North Carolina shall (8) be of good moral character.”

9. 12 NCAC 10B .0204(b)(2) provides:

(b) The Commission shall revoke, deny, or suspend the certification of a justice officer when the Commission finds that the applicant for certification or the certified officer:

(2) fails to meet or maintain any of the minimum employment or certification standards required by 12 NCAC 10B .0300.

ADJUDICATED FACTS

10. At the administrative hearing, Petitioner admitted to writing three worthless checks as identified by docket numbers 1995CR 00711, 1996CR 730, and 1997CR 6517. Mr. John Moore, her supervisor at Columbus County EMS, gave her the Personal History Statement (Form F-3) to complete as a pre-condition to receiving telecommunicator certification.

11. Question number 47 of the F-3 Form reads: “Have you ever been arrested by a law enforcement officer or otherwise charged with a criminal offense? Petitioner answered “NO.” At the hearing, Petitioner acknowledged that she read the “Note” typed above question number 47. That Note stated:

If any doubt exists in your mind as to whether or not you were arrested or charged with a criminal offense at some point in your life or whether an offense remains on your record, you should answer ‘YES.’

As used in this question, the term ‘charged’ includes being issued a citation or criminal summons.

12. Question number 57 on the F-3 Form reads: “Have you ever paid a fine in excess of $50.00, excluding court costs?”. In answering this question Petitioner answered “NO”. She conceded that she remembered a check for $40.00, but didn’t think the fines were over $50.00.

13. At the administrative hearing, Petitioner also admitted that she did not list the checks in her answer to question 47 because she thought she only had to list felonies.

14. Petitioner remembered sheriff’s deputies showing up at her home on different occasions and serving her with two separate criminal summons for worthless checks represented by 1996-CR-730 and 1997-CR-6517. She recalled that after that, she drove to the county Clerk of Court’s office, and “paid off” the checks.

15. In reference to the Whiteville Oil Company check (1996-CR-730), Petitioner recalled when she was completing the F-3 form, a check that started with a “W,” but did not list it on the form because she thought the check was less than $50.00.

16. On August 8, 2002, Petitioner wrote another letter after she was informed by her boss, Mr. John Moore, that there was a problem with her certification. In this letter, Petitioner stated that she was familiar with one charge against her for a worthless check, identified as the “Whiteville Oil Co. Check (1996-CR-730). She could not, however, recall the other charge, identified as the “Medicine Shoppe” check (1997-CR-6517). She further indicated that she left the one charge she remembered, off her Personal History Statement, because she felt it would have fallen under question 53 which asked about fines exceeding $50.00. (Resp Exh 9)

17. However, in Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories, dated December 15, 2002, (Resp Exh 7), Petitioner claimed, in response to Interrogatory number 3(b), that she did not remember the charge of worthless check for docket number 1996-CR-730, the Whiteville Oil Co. check. This answer directly contradicts her statement in Respondent’s Exhibit number 9.

18. On October 23, 2002, Petitioner requested a hearing to appeal the denial of her Justice Officer – Telecommunicator’s certification. (Resp Exh 8) In that letter, Petitioner indicated that “since my fine [caused by her worthless check conviction] was under the reportable amount, excluding court cost, that this issue was not reportable on my Personal History Statement.”

19. Petitioner admitted that as a law enforcement dispatcher, one of her duties is to inform the Law Enforcement Officers when there are outstanding warrants or summons to be served. These warrants and summons are often for the criminal offense of worthless checks.

20. Mr. Moore did not learn about the checks in question until the Sheriff Standards Division brought the issue to his attention. Petitioner never mentioned anything about the charges of worthless checks to Moore until after the questions concerning Petitioner’s certification had been raised. Mr. Moore opined that Petitioner is an excellent employee at Columbus County Emergency Services.

21. Mr. Ted Sauls is the Assistant Director of the Sheriff Standards Division. His job functions are to supervise and conduct criminal history checks on potential justice officers as necessary. Telecommunicators fall under the definition of justice officer for the purposes of certification.

22. In Mr. Sauls’ opinion, honesty and integrity are essential attributes to be a justice officer.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. This matter is properly before the undersigned Administrative Law Judge, and jurisdiction and venue are proper.

2. Pursuant to 12 NCAC 10B .0204(c)(1) and (2), the Commission may revoke, suspend, or deny the certification of a justice officer when the Commission finds that the applicant for certification or the certified officer has knowingly made material misrepresentations of information required for certification.

3. On or about October 20, 1997, Petitioner was convicted of the Class A misdemeanor offense of passing a worthless check when she pled guilty, by waiver, to the Class A Misdemeanor of a Simple Worthless Check, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-107(d)(1) in Columbus County District Court.(1997-CR-6517)

4. On or about February 12, 1996, Petitioner was convicted of the Class A misdemeanor of passing a worthless check, when she pled guilty, by waiver, to the Class A Misdemeanor of a Simple Worthless Check, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. §14-107(d)(1) in Columbus County District Court. (1996-CR-730)

5. Petitioner’s omissions of these two worthless check offenses constitute knowing material misrepresentation of information required for certification.

6. Respondent’s proposed denial of the Petitioner’s application for certification is supported by substantial evidence.

PROPOSAL FOR DECISION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the undersigned hereby determines that Petitioner’s certification should be DENIED for a period of not less than five years for making material misrepresentations of information required for certification.

NOTICE AND ORDER

N.C. Sheriffs’ Education and Training Standards Commission is the agency that will make the Final Decision in this contested case. As the final decision-maker, that agency is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to this proposal for decision, to submit proposed findings of fact, and to present oral and written arguments to the agency pursuant to G.S. 150B-40(e).

It is hereby ordered that the agency serve a copy of the final decision on the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714, in accordance with G.S. 150B-36(b).

This the 22nd day of May, 2003.

__________________________

Melissa Owens Lassiter

Administrative Law Judge

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download