16-005551PL Pam Stewart, As Commissioner Of Education vs. Patti Guadagno Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, June 12, 2017.

Summary: In light of subsequent teaching performance, Petitioner did not prove personal conduct which seriously reduces effectiveness, but proved that Respondent obtained a teaching certificate by fraudulent means, which warranted license suspension.

EXCEPTION 3 (Paragraph 20 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it does not have substantial jurisdiction to determine if the attorney­

client privilege was waived, and it addresses the credibility of testimony.

EXCEPTION 4 (Paragraph 21 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it addresses the credibility of witnesses.

EXCEPTION 5 (Paragraph 22 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it addresses the credibility of witnesses.

Ruling on Respondent's Exceptions

To Conclusions of Law

EXCEPTION 6 (Paragraph 36 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because Respondent testified that she received the notice on March 6, 2012.

EXCEPTION 7 (Paragraph 37 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it addresses the credibility of witnesses.

EXCEPTION 8 (Paragraph 38 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it does not have substantive jurisdiction to determine what

constitutes "clear and convincing evidence." The Commission can only determine if

there was no competent substantial evidence.

EXCEPTION 9 (Paragraph 44 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected the

exception because it addresses the credibility of witnesses.

EXCEPTION 10 (Paragraph 45 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it does not have substantive jurisdiction to determine what

constitutes "clear and convincing evidence." The Commission can only determine if

there was no competent substantial evidence.

EXCEPTION 11 (Paragraph 47 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it relies on the exceptions to Paragraph 7 of the Findings of

Fact.

EXCEPTION 12 (Paragraph 49 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it does not have substantive jurisdiction to determine what

constitutes "clear and convincing evidence." The Commission can only determine if

there was no competent substantial evidence.

EXCEPTION 13 (Paragraph 51 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it relies on the exceptions to Paragraphs 20-22 of the Findings

of Fact.

EXCEPTION 14 (Paragraph 52 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it does not have substantive jurisdiction to determine what

constitutes "clear and convincing evidence." The Commission can only determine if

there was no competent substantial evidence.

EXCEPTION 15 (Paragraph 54 of Recommended Order): The Commission rejected

the exception because it relies on the exceptions to Paragraphs 20-22 of the Findings

of Fact.

Ruling on Petitioner's Exception

To Recommended Penalty

The Commission rejected the Petitioner's Exception to the Recommended

Penalty stating that the Respondent's history cited in the exception is unsubstantiated

except for the suspension for pushing a student.

Findings of Fact

1. The findings of fact set forth in the Recommended Order are approved and

adopted and incorporated herein by reference.

2. There is competent substantial evidence to support the findings of fact.

Conclusions of Law

1 . The Education Practices Commission has jurisdiction of this matter pursuant

to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, and Chapter 1012, Florida Statutes.

2. The conclusions of law set forth in the Recommended Order are approved

and adopted and incorporated herein by reference.

Penalty

Upon a complete review of the record in this case, the Commission determines

that the penalty recommended by the Administrative Law Judge be ACCEPTED. It is

therefore ORDERED that:

Respondent's Florida educator's certificate is hereby suspended for a period of 1

year from the date of this Final Order.

This Final Order takes effect upon filing with the Clerk of the Education Practices

Commission.

DONE AND ORDERED, this gth day of August, 2017.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW

A PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL ORDER IS ENTITLED

TO JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES.

REVIEW PROCEEDINGS ARE GOVERNED BY THE FLORIDA RULES OF

APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUCH PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED BY FILING

ONE COPY OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE EDUCATION PRACTICES

COMMISSION AND A SECOND COPY, ACCOMPANIED BY FILING FEES

PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST

DISTRICT, OR WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN THE APPELLATE

DISTRICT WHERE THE PARTY RESIDES. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE

FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF RENDITION OF THIS ORDER.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing Order was mailed to PATII GUADAGNO,

9010 Southwest 12th Street, Miami, FL 33174 and Melissa C. Mihok, Esq., 201 East Pine

Street, Suite 445, Orlando, FL 32801. by Certified U.S. Mail and by electronic mail to Darby

Shaw, Deputy General Counsel, Suite 1232, Turlington Building, 325 West Gaines Street,

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 and Charles T. Whitelock, Esq., 300 Southeast 13th

Street, Suite E, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316-1924 this ...l!L_ day , 2017.

Lisa Forbess, Clerk

Education Practices Commission

COPIES FURNISHED TO:

Office of Professional Practices Services

Bureau of Educator Certification

Superintendent of Schools

1450 NE Second Avenue #912

Miami, FL 33132

Director

Office of Professional Standards

Dade County Schools

1500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 222

Miami, FL 33132

Lee Ann Gustafson

Senior Assistant Attorney General

F. SCOTT BOYD

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550

Claudia Llado, Clerk

Division of Administrative Hearings