03-001957 Department Of Financial Services vs. Pamela Jean Coleman Status: Closed Recommended Order on Friday, October 17, 2003.

Summary: Respondent, who was convicted of a felony and was given executive clemency, acted as a bail bond processor without a bail bond license. A Cease and Desist Order was entered.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL )

SERVICES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 03 - 1957

)

PAMELA JEAN COLEMAN, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursu ant to notice and in accordance with Sections 120.569

and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, a formal hearing was held in

this case, on August 12, 2003, in Bartow, Florida, before

Fred L. Buckine, the designated Administrative Law Judge of the

Division of Admin istrative Hearings.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Dickson E. Kesler, Esquire

Department of Financial Services

401 Northwest Second Avenue, Suite N - 321

Miami, Florida 33128

For Respondent: James R. Franklin, Esquire

The Franklin & Carmichael Law Firm, P.A.

301 East Main Street

Post Office Box 50

Bartow, Florida 33806

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue for determination is whether Respondent violated

Subsections 648.44(8)(a), 648.44(8)(b), 648.45(2), 648.45(2)(e),

648.45(2)(j), 648.45(2)(k), 648.45(3), 648.45(3)(c),

648.45(3)(e), 648.30(1), 648.30(2), 648.30(3), and 648.30(4),

Florida Statutes.

PRELIMINA RY STATEMENT

On May 27, 2003, the Department of Financial Services

(Department) referred, to the Division of Administrative

Hearings (DOAH), its letter dated April 1, 2003, informing

Respondent of its First Amended Notice of Intent to Issue Cease

and Desis t Order (Notice of Intent) against Respondent.

Respondent denied the allegations and elected for a formal

adversarial proceeding to be heard before DOAH pursuant to

Subsection 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

The parties filed a joint Pre - Hearing Stipulation with DOAH

on August 4, 2003.

On June 10, 2003, a Notice of Hearing, scheduling the final

hearing for August 12, 2003, and an Order of Pre - Hearing

Instructions were entered.

At the final hearing on August 12, 2003, six witnesses

testified on behalf of the D epartment: Special Investigator

Constance Castor; Drug Enforcement Agency Special Agent

Michael P. Kreis (by deposition); Frances Ann Parish; Luis

Rivera; Noel Elizabeth "Nikki" Collier; and Clarence Luther

Cephas, Sr. On the advice and consent of couns el, Respondent

asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege and did not testify.

Respondent called no witnesses and presented no testimony.

The Department offered ten exhibits (P - 1 through P - 10),

including the deposition of Michael P. Kreis, which were

accept ed in evidence. Respondent offered four exhibits (R - 1

through R - 4), which were accepted in evidence.

The Department, in its final order rendered on July 30,

2003, adopted in toto the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law of the Administrative Law Judge in a related case,

Department of Financial Services v. Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr. ,

DOAH Case No. 03 - 0798PL, of which the undersigned took official

recognition.

On August 12, 2003, the 30 - day appeal period had not

expired, and counsel for Respondent, who w as also counsel for

Respondent, Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr., in DOAH Case

No. 03 - 0798PL, represented that an appeal on behalf of Clarence

Luther Cephas, Sr., would be timely filed in DOAH Case

No. 03 - 0798PL.

Counsel for Respondent was counsel of record f or both

Respondent and Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr., in their joint

criminal trial by jury in Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX, State of

Florida vs. Pamela Jean Coleman, W/F, 9/17/58, XXX - XX - 9751 , in

the Tenth Judicial Circuit in and for Polk County, Florida. In

th at proceeding, the jury found Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr., not

guilty as charged and found Respondent guilty of violating

Subsection 648.44(8), Florida Statutes. The allegations

contained in Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX were identical to the

allegations contai ned in count one of Petitioner's Notice of

Intent. Respondent's counsel stipulated for the record that

Respondent, Pamela Jean Coleman, W/F, DOB September 17, 1958,

XXX - XX - 9751, also known as Deborah Lee Diehl, Pamela Jean Jones,

Pamela Jones, Pamela Cole man, Pam Jones, and Pamela J. Coleman,

was the person he represented and the person who was convicted

in Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX and entered into evidence, as

Respondent's Exhibit R - 3, a certified copy of the Notice of

Appeal filed on behalf of Respondent in the Second District

Court of Appeal.

On August 27, 2003, the Transcript was filed. An order

dated September 5, 2003, granting Respondent's Motion for

Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Order and

extending the filing deadline was entered. P etitioner's

Proposed Recommended Order was filed on September 2, 2003.

Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order was filed on

September 22, 2003. All Proposed Recommended Orders have been

considered.

Official Recognition was taken of Chapters 624 through 632,

634, 635, 641, 648, and 651, Florida Statutes, which constitute

the "Florida Insurance Code." See Section 624.01, Florida

Statutes. All statutory citations are to Florida Statutes

(2003), unless otherwise indicated.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Pursuant t o Chapter 648, the Department has

jurisdiction over bail bond licensure, appointments, and related

activities.

2. Respondent, Pamela Jean Coleman, appeared before the

undersigned in this proceeding, identified herself as Pamela

Jean Coleman, and admitted that she is the Respondent in this

matter and that the Department has jurisdiction over her and the

subject matter involved in the Notice of Intent.

3. At all times relevant to the dates and occurrences

referred to in the Notice of Intent, Respondent was also known

as Deborah Lee Diehl, Pamela Jean Jones, Pamela Jones, Pamela

Coleman, Pam Jones, and Pamela J. Coleman.

4. At all times relevant to the dates and occurrences

referred to in the Notice of Intent, Respondent was not licensed

as a bail bond agent in the State of Florida.

5. On March 28, 1975, in Case Number 75 - 239CF, in the

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida

(Criminal Division), Respondent pled guilty and was adjudged

guilty of buying or receiving or aiding in concea lment of stolen

property, a felony (a crime of moral turpitude).

6. On October 22, 1975, in Case Number 75 - 2390CF,

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida

(Criminal Division), Respondent, a/k/a Deborah Lee Diehl, pled

guilty and w as adjudged guilty of the felony of violation of

drug abuse law.

7. Records of the State of Florida Department of Law

Enforcement (FDLE) show that the conviction set forth in

paragraph 6 above included convictions on March 28, 1975, and

July 17, 1975, for parole violation. At the final hearing

counsel for Respondent stated:

Mr. Franklin: . . . I don't think there is

any dispute as to those underlying facts

about what happened in 1975 --

Ms. Coleman: Correct.

Mr. Franklin: -- and what happened

subsequ ent. And the subsequent event was

that Ms. Coleman was -- received the grace

of executive clemency. She did receive a

limited restoration of civil rights that

granted to her the restoration of all of her

civil rights with the exception of a

specific stat utory authority to own or

possess a firearm, at least as to all of the

'75 convictions. . . .

8. By Executive Order Number 80 - C - 0 filed with the Florida

Secretary of State on March 7, 1980, Respondent was granted

restoration of civil rights, except to sp ecific authority for

possession or owning a firearm, for any and all felony

convictions in the State of Florida and/or restoration of civil

rights in the State of Florida for any and all felony

convictions in any state other than Florida, or in any United

States court or military court for which this person has been

duly discharged from imprisonment and/or parole, adult community

control or probation, and for which this person has not been

heretofore granted clemency. This grant of clemency included,

but w as not limited to, Case Nos. 75 - 239CF and 75 - 2390CF, in the

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach, Florida.

9. On April 16, 1991, in Case Number CF91 - 1923AI - XX, Tenth

Judicial Circuit in and for Polk County, Florida, Respondent,

a/k/a Pamela J ean Jones, was charged with grand thief. On or

about November 25, 1991, Respondent pled nolo contendere to the

reduced charge of petit theft and was found guilty and convicted

of petit theft. 1 Petit theft is a first - degree misdemeanor,

which constitutes a crime of moral turpitude.

10. Record of the Delaware Secretary of State, dated

May 5, 1997, confirmed that the Clarence Luther Cephas, Ltd.,

Inc. (Cephas Bail Bond Agency) was duly incorporated under the

laws of the State of Delaware, was in good stand ing, and had a

legal corporate existence as of May 5, 1997.

11. Record of the Florida Secretary of State, Application

for Reinstatement, confirmed that the Cephas Bail Bond Agency

applied as a corporation qualified to do bail bond business in

Florida an d was reinstated to do bail bond business as of

January 19, 1999. The Cephas Bail Bond Agency's application

listed Pamela J. Coleman, 2353 Mammoth Grove Road, Lake Wales,

Florida, as its president, secretary, director, and registered

agent. The applicati on dated October 26, 2000, bore the

signature of Respondent and listed her telephone number as

(863) 533 - 0405.

12. Two Uniform Business Reports (UBR) of the Cephas Bail

Bond Agency were filed with the Florida Secretary of State on

August 6, 2001, and M arch 29, 2002. Both reports bore the

signature of Respondent as President of the Cephas Bail Bond

Agency.

13. Testimony of Petitioner's witnesses conclusively

established, without dispute, that Respondent participated in

the bail bond business of the C ephas Bail Bond Agency during the

approximate period of March 1997 to November 27, 2002. During

that span of time, Respondent did on various occasions act and

represent herself to the public as one having power to act in

several capacities and positions w ith the Cephas Bail Bond

Agency. Her activities included acting as a registered agent, a

director, a bail bond agent, a temporary bail bond agent, a

runner, a bail enforcement agent, and a bounty hunter.

14. Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr., under oath on

November 27, 2002, gave the following statement:

I have known Pamela Coleman/Jones for

approximately four years and she has been

affiliated with me for most of the time that

I have been in the bail bond business. I

had asked her if she had ever been conv icted

of a felony and she said that she had been

convicted as a teenager. She has a

Certificate of Restoration of Civil Rights

from the Office of Executive Clemency that

is dated March 7, 1980. I was under the

impression that if her rights had been

resto red, that it would not be a problem

with her working for me. I named Pamela as

an officer in my corporation because I did

not have any family that I could list as an

officer except for my daughter, who is a

deputy sheriff and could not be an officer

of th e corporation.

15. Records of the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial

Circuit in and for Polk County, Florida, show that on or about

December 16, 2002, an Amended Information was filed in Case

No. CF02 - 00597A - XX, State of Florida vs. Pamela Jean Coleman ,

W/F, 09/17/1958, XXX - XX - 9751 , charging that between November 27,

2000, and January 25, 2002, in Polk County, Florida, Respondent,

having been convicted of or pled guilty or no contest to a

felony or a crime involving moral turpitude or a crime

punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the law of

any state, territory, or county, regardless of whether

adjudication of guilt was withheld, did participate as a

director, officer, manager, or employee of a bail bond agency or

office thereof, or exerci se direct or indirect control in any

manner in such agency or office, or own shares in a closely held

corporation which had an interest in a bail bond business,

contrary to Section 684.44.

16. The testimonial and documentary evidence clearly and

convinc ingly, during the period of November 2000 through

December 2001, identified Respondent as the person who, on

various occasions, did act in several capacities and positions

as a bail bond agent and performed functions, duties, or powers

prescribed for licen sed bail bond agents.

17. Undisputed evidence identified Respondent as the

person who, early in 2001, presented herself to another and

engaged in conduction and solicitation of bail bond business in

the office of the Cephas Bail Bond Agency.

18. Undisput ed evidence identified Respondent as the

person who, on June 19, 2001, presented herself and identified

herself as Pamela Jean Coleman, Vice - President of Clarence

Cephas Bail Bonds, to Noel Collier who was working in her

husband's law office as a paralegal . Respondent presented to

Ms. Collier bond release paperwork from the Cephas Bail Bond

Agency and requested that a mutual client facing criminal

charges sign the paperwork.

19. Undisputed evidence demonstrated that on or about

September 2001, Respondent held herself out as the person with

whom to conduct bail bond business with Constance Castro in or

about the home of Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr., that served also

as the Cephas Bail Bond Agency office.

20. The records of Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicia l

Circuit in and for Polk County, Florida, show that on or about

January 31, 2003, in criminal Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX,

Respondent (a/k/a Deborah Lee Diehl, a/k/a Pamela Jean Jones,

a/k/a Pamela Jones, a/k/a Pamela Coleman, a/k/a Pam Jones, and

a/k/a Pamel a J. Coleman) was tried, found guilty, and

adjudicated guilty of a violation of Subsection 648.44(8),

acting as a bail bondsman while being a convicted felon, a

felony of the third degree, as charged in the aforesaid Amended

Information.

21. Respondent was sentenced by the court to 60 days in

county jail (to be served on weekends) and placed on probation

for a period of five years. The conditions of Respondent's

probation required her to: (1) Pay restitution in the amount of

$457.99 to the Department o f Insurance within two years; (2) pay

court costs of $400.00 within two years; and (3) not to be

employed as a bail bondsman or to have any contact with her

husband's (Clarence Luther Cephas, Sr.) business.

22. Counsel for Respondent represented on this record

that: (1) he was counsel of record in Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX

and that Respondent, in this proceeding, was the person charged,

tried, convicted, and adjudicated guilty; and (2) he has filed a

timely appeal of the conviction and sentence on behalf o f

Respondent in Case No. CF02 - 00597A - XX, in the Second District

Court of Appeal.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

23. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of these

proceedings pursuant to Subsection 120.57( 1).

24. Petitioner has jurisdiction over the insurance - related

activities and eligibility for insurance licensure of Respondent

pursuant to Chapters 624, 626, and 648.

25. Petitioner alleged that Respondent, who had been

convicted of or who had pled guil ty or no contest to a felony or

a crime involving moral turpitude, participated as a director,

officer, manager, or employee of a bail bond agency in violation

of Subsections 648.44(8)(a), 648.44(8)(b), 648.45(2),

648.45(2)(e), 648.45(2)(j), 648.45(2)(k), 648.45(3),

648.45(3)(c), and 648.45(3)(e).

26. Subsection 648.44(8)(a) and (b) reads as follows:

(a) A person who has been convicted or

who has pleaded guilty or no contest to a

felony or a crime involving moral turpitude

or a crime punishable by impri sonment of 1

year or more under the law of any state,

territory, or country, regardless of whether

adjudication of guilt was withheld may not

participate as a director, officer, manager,

or employee of any bail bond agency or

office thereof or exercise dir ect or

indirect control in any manner in such

agency or officer or own shares in any

closely held corporation which has any

interest in any bail bond business. Such

restrictions on engaging in the bail bond

business shall continue to apply during a

pendin g appeal. (emphasis added)

(b) Any person who violates the

provisions of paragraph (a) or any person

who knowingly permits a person who has been

convicted of or who has pleaded guilty or no

contest to a crime as described in paragraph

(a) to engage in the bail bond business as

prohibited in paragraph (a) commits a felony

of the third degree, punishable as provided

in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084

27. Subsection 648.45(2) reads, in pertinent part:

(2) The department shall deny, suspend,

rev oke, or refuse to renew any license or

appointment issued under this chapter or the

insurance code, and it shall suspend or

revoke the eligibility of any person to hold

a license or appointment under this chapter

or the insurance code, for any violation of

the laws of this state relating to bail or

any violation of the insurance code or for

any of the following causes:

* * *

(e) Demonstrated lack of fitness or

trustworthiness to engage in the bail bond

business.

* * *

(j) Willful failure to comply with or

willful violation of any proper order or

rule of the department or willful violation

of any provision of this chapter or the

insurance code.

(k) Has been found guilty of, or has

pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony, a

c rime involving moral turpitude, or a crime

punishable by imprisonment of 1 year or more

under the law of any state, territory, or

country, whether or not a judgment or

conviction has been entered.

28. Subsection 648.45(3) reads, in pertinent part:

(3) The department may deny, suspend,

revoke, or refuse to renew any license or

appointment issued under this chapter or the

insurance code, or it may suspend or revoke

the eligibility of any person to hold a

license or appointment under this chapter or

the i nsurance code, for any violation of the

laws of this state relating to bail or any

violation of the insurance code or for any

of the following causes:

* * *

(c) Violation of any law relating to the

business of bail bond insurance or violation

of any provision of the insurance code.

* * *

(e) Being found to be a source of injury

or loss to the public or detrimental to the

public interest or being found by the

department to be no longer carrying on the

bail bond business in good fai th.

29. Respondent argues that Executive Order number 80 - C - 0

restored her civil rights; thus, she was not disqualified to be

a bail bond agent by means of her prior criminal convictions.

However, Respondent's full civil rights were not restored. Cf.

Sa ndlin v. Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission ,

531 So. 2d 1344 (Fla. 1988) (A full pardon removes all

disabilities resulting from a crime.).

30. Assuming arguendo that the pre - 1980 criminal

convictions are not a bar to participating in bail bond agent

activities, Respondent's 1992 conviction of petit theft is a

bar. Petit theft is a crime involving moral turpitude. See The

Florida Bar v. Davis , 361 So. 2d 159, 161 (Fla. 1978).

31. Petitioner has established by clear and convincing

evidence that Respondent violated Subsections 648.44(8)(a);

648.45(2)(e), (j), and (k); 648.45(3)(c); and 648.45(3)(e).

32. The evidence is clear and convincing that during the

approximate period of time of March 1997 through December 2002,

Respondent was a convi cted felon and/or had pled nolo contendere

to a crime involving moral turpitude, a first degree misdemeanor

crime; was employed and/or did, on various occasions, act in the

capacity of a bail bond agent, temporary bail bond agent, or

runner, and/or perform ed the functions, duties, or powers

prescribed for bail bond agents or runners as set forth in

Chapter 648; and participated as a director, officer, manager,

or employee of a bail bond agency or office thereof.

33. In Count two of the Notice of Intent, Pe titioner

alleged that Respondent was unlicensed and acted in the capacity

of a bail bond agent, temporary bail bond agent, or runner, or

performed any of the functions, duties, or powers thereof.

Petitioner alleged that Respondent's unlicensed activities were

in violation of Subsections 648.30(1), 648.30(2), 648.30(3),

648.30(4), 648.45(2), 648.45(2)(e), 648.45(2)(j), 648.45(3),

648.45(3)(c), and 648.45(3)(e).

34. Section 648.30 reads as follows:

Licensure and appointment required. --

(1) A person ma y not act in the capacity

of a bail bond agent , temporary bail bond

agent, or runner or perform any of the

functions duties, or powers prescribed for

bail bond agents or runners under this

chapter unless that person is qualified,

licensed and approved as p rovided in this

chapter.

(2) No person shall represent himself or

herself to be a bail enforcement agent,

bounty hunter, or other similar title in

this state.

(3) No person, other than a certified law

enforcement officer, shall be authorized to

app rehend, detain or arrest a principal on a

bond, wherever issued, unless that person is

qualified, licensed, and appointed as

provided in this chapter or licensed as a

bail bond agent by the state where the bond

was written.

(4) Any person who violates any provision

of this section commits a felony of the

third degree, punishable as provided in s.

775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(emphasis added)

35. Petitioner has established by clear and convincing

evidence that Respondent was unlicensed and acte d in the

capacity of a bail bond agent, temporary bail bond agent, and

runner between March 1997 to December 2001. Thus, Petitioner

has, by clear and convincing evidence, established that

Respondent violated Subsections 648.30(1) through (4),

648.45(2)(e) , 648.45(2)(j), 648.45(3)(c), and 648.45(3)(e).

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is

RECOMMENDED that Petitioner enter a final order as follows:

1. Finding that Respondent, Pamela Jean Coleman, is

disqualifi ed from participation in bail bond - related activities

by a prior conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; and

that Respondent is guilty of participating in the bail bond

business, in violation of Subsections 648.30(1) through (3);

648.44(8)(a); 648 .45(2)(e), (j), and (k); and 648.45(3)(a), (c),

and (e).

2. Enter a Cease and Desist Order pursuant to

Section 626.9581 and the Florida Insurance Code, directing

Respondent, Pamela Jean Coleman, to immediately cease and desist

any and all bail bond - relat ed activities in the State of

Florida.

DONE AND ENTERED this 17th day of October, 2003, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

FRED L. BUCKINE

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto B uilding

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 17th day of October, 2003.

ENDNOTE

1/ Respondent's Social Security number listed in the court

records contained in Petitioner's Exhibit 5 is the same Social

Security number identifying Respondent in Petitioner's

Exhibit 6, which contains court records relating to Respondent's

conviction in Ca se No. CF02 - 00597A - XX.

COPIES FURNISHED :

James R. Franklin, Esquire

The Franklin & Carmichael Law Firm, P.A.

301 East Main Street

Post Office Box 50

Bartow, Florida 33806

Dickson E. Kesler, Esquire

Department of Financial Services

401 Northwest Second Avenue, Suite N - 321

Miami, Florida 33128

Honorable Tom Gallagher

Chief Financial Officer

Department of Financial Services

The Capitol, Plaza Level 11

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0300

Mark Casteel, General Counsel

Department of Financial Services

The Capitol, Plaza Level 11

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0300

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

15 days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions

to this recommended order shoul d be filed with the agency that

will issue the final order in this case.