01-004498 Hatim Bilai Seifuddin vs. Department Of Juvenile Justice Status: Closed Recommended Order on Wednesday, February 13, 2002.

Summary: Petitioner entitled to exemption from employment disqualification; domestic violence in 1996 was an isolated incident.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HATIM BILAI SEIFUDDIN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 01 - 4498

)

DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A formal hearing was conducted in this case on January 30,

2002, in Tallahassee, Florida, before the Division of

Administrative Hearings by it Administrative Law Judge,

Suzanne F. Hood.

APPEARANCE

For Petitioner: Warren J. Bird, Esquire

128 Salem Court

Tallahassee, Florida 32818

For Respondent: Richard M. Coln, Esquire

Department of Juvenile Justice

Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tall ahassee, Florida 32399 - 3100

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether Respondent should grant Petitioner an

exemption from employment disqualification.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By letter dated August 31, 2001, Respondent Department of

Juvenile Justice (Respondent) advised Petitioner Hatim Bilai

Seifuddin (Petitioner) that his request for an exemption from

employment disqualification had been denied. On or about

October 9, 2001, Petitioner requested a formal hearing to

contest the denial of his request . Respondent referred this

case to the Division of Administrative Hearings on November 8,

2001.

A Notice of Hearing dated December 4, 2001, scheduled the

case for hearing on January 30, 2002. The parties filed a

Pretrial Stipulation on January 22, 2002.

During the hearing, Petitioner testified on his own behalf

and presented the testimony of one witness. Petitioner offered

two exhibits which were accepted into evidence. Respondent did

not present any witness testimony but offered 15 exhibits which

we re accepted into evidence.

The parties did not file a transcript of the proceedings.

Petitioner filed his Proposed Recommended Order on February 4,

2002. Respondent filed its Proposed Recommended Order on

February 8, 2002.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Responde nt, or its predecessor, has employed Petitioner

since 1991. Currently, Petitioner is employed by Respondent as

a senior juvenile detention officer.

2. On or about June 24, 1996, Petitioner pushed his

girlfriend, Yolando Holmes, causing her to fall thro ugh a glass

table top. The incident occurred when Miss Holmes asked

Petitioner to leave her apartment and grabbed Petitioner's arm.

Miss Holmes suffered some superficial cuts and scrapes but did

not require emergency medical treatment.

3. Petitioner l eft Miss Holmes's apartment immediately

after the incident. However, in the days that followed,

Petitioner repeatedly called Miss Holmes on the telephone.

4. Miss Holmes subsequently filed a complaint alleging

domestic battery against Petitioner. A ci rcuit judge signed a

Probable Cause Affidavit involving this charge on or about

July 19, 1996.

5. Petitioner turned himself in on July 25, 1996, shortly

after he learned that there was a warrant for his arrest. At or

about the same time, Petitioner d isclosed the charges against

him to his supervisor and others who worked for Respondent in a

supervisory capacity.

6. On or about October 10, 1996, Petitioner pled nolo

contendere to one count of harassing phone calls and one count

of domestic battery. The court withheld adjudication on both

counts, but sentenced Petitioner to one year of probation on the

domestic battery charge with a concurrent sentence of six

months' probation for the harassing phone calls charge. The

court required Petitioner to at tend the New Hope Batterer's

Intervention Program, to complete 50 hours of community service,

and to have no contact with Miss Holmes.

7. The court entered a Termination Notice on September 30,

1997. This notice states that Petitioner had complied with all

conditions of his probation.

8. In 2001, a routine criminal background check "revealed"

Petitioner's 1996 domestic battery charge. Respondent then

advised Petitioner that he was disqualified from his job which

involves contact with juveniles. Res pondent subsequently denied

Petitioner's request for an exemption from employment

disqualification.

9. Respondent never disciplined Petitioner even though

Respondent was aware that Petitioner had been charged with

domestic battery. The charges against Petitioner did not affect

his job in any way until Respondent conducted a periodic

criminal records background check almost five years later.

10. In the five years since the domestic battery incident,

Petitioner has continued to perform his job duties as a senior

juvenile detention officer. These duties place Petitioner in

close proximity to potentially violent young people on a daily

basis. Petitioner is able to interact with these juveniles in

an exemplary fashion.

11. Petitioner's mild, reserved, a nd controlled nature is

extremely well suited for working with juvenile detainees.

After their release from the system, Petitioner continues to

voluntarily interact with these juveniles in the community,

serving as a positive role model on his own time.

12. Petitioner's work performance is of a superlative

quality. Petitioner has a special knowledge of the computer

systems in Respondent's nerve center. He often serves as a

source of training for other employees.

13. Petitioner and Miss Holmes did not continue their

romantic involvement after the domestic battery incident.

However, Petitioner and Miss Holmes subsequently reestablished

their friendship. They maintain frequent contact with each

other even though Miss Holmes has moved to another county.

14. Petitioner is remorseful about his behavior in 1996.

That incident is the only example of violent behavior by

Petitioner before or after July 1996. Petitioner has a healthy

relationship with his current "significant other."

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

15 . The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this

case. Sections 120.569 and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

16. Respondent is required to conduct periodic criminal

records background checks of individ uals who are employed with

Respondent in positions of special trust, such as working in

programs for children or youths. See Sections 985.01(2)(b) and

435.04, Florida Statutes.

17. Pursuant to Section 435.04(3)(b), Florida Statutes,

individuals like Pet itioner, who are guilty of domestic violence

as defined in Section 741.30, Florida Statutes, are prohibited

from working in a position of special trust, unless they are

granted an exemption from employment disqualification under

Section 435.07(3), Florida Statutes.

18. Petitioner has the burden to establish by clear and

convincing evidence that he should not be disqualified from

employment. Section 435.07(3), Florida Statutes, states as

follows:

(3) In order for a licensing department

to grant an exem ption to any employee, the

employee must demonstrate by clear and

convincing evidence that the employee should

not be disqualified from employment.

Employees seeking an exemption have the

burden of setting forth sufficient evidence

of rehabilitation, incl uding, but not

limited to, the circumstances surrounding

the criminal incident for which an exemption

is sought, the time period that has elapsed

since the incident, the nature of the harm

caused to the victim, and the history of the

employee since the inc ident, or any other

evidence or circumstances indicating that

the employee will not present a danger if

continued employment is allowed. The

decision of the licensing department

regarding an exemption may be contested

through the hearing procedures set fo rth in

chapter 120.

19. In this case, Petitioner met his burden of proving

that he will not present a danger if he continues to work as a

senior juvenile detention officer. Petitioner has explained and

expressed remorse for his actions in July 1996. He successfully

completed his probation and has not exhibited any violent

behavior since that time. Petitioner continues to perform his

job in an exemplary manner, commanding the personal and

professional respect of his co - workers. Petitioner has

presented sufficient evidence of rehabilitation.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is

RECOMMENDED:

That Respondent enter a final order granting Petitioner an

exemption from employment disqualification.

DONE AND ENT ERED this 13th day of February, 2002, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

___________________________________

SUZANNE F. HOOD

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32 399 - 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 13th day of February, 2002.

COPIES FURNISHED :

Warren J. Bird, Esquire

128 Salem Court

Tallahas see, Florida 32301

Richard M. Coln, Esquire

Department of Juvenile Justice

Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3100

William G. Bankhead, Secretary

Department of Juvenile Justice

Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tallaha ssee, Florida 32399 - 3100

Robert N. Sechen, General Counsel

Department of Juvenile Justice

Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3100

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written except ions within

15 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

will issue the final order in this case.