03-004586 Marjorie Blanc vs. Department Of Law Enforcement Status: Closed Recommended Order on Tuesday, March 8, 2005.

Summary: The submission of an erroneous test result disqualified Petitioner for a five-year period.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

MARJORIE BLANC, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 03 - 4586

)

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW )

ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL JUSTICE )

STANDARDS & TRAINING COMMISSION, )

)

Respondent. )

_________________________________)

RECOMMENDED ORDE R

Pursuant to notice a formal hearing was held in this case

by video teleconference on January 5, 2005, with the Petitioner

appearing from Miami, Florida, before J. D. Parrish, a

designated Administrative Law Judge of the Division of

Administrative Hearin gs.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Ronald J. Cohen, Esquire

8100 Oak Lane, Suite 403

Miami Lakes, Florida 33016

For Respondent: Grace A. Jaye, Esquire

Florida Department of Law En forcement

Post Office Box 1489

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 1489

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether the Petitioner submitted a false test result to the

Miami - Dade College School of Justice in order to register for

the Correctional Officer Basic Recruit Training Course.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On August 22, 2003, the Florida Department of Law

Enforcement, Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission

(Respondent) issued a letter notifying the Petitioner, Marjorie

Blanc, that she had engaged in conduct that subverts the Basic

Abilities Test process and that her test results for any test

taken after May 22, 2003, would be nullified. The notice

further advised Petitioner that she would be prohibited from

taking a Ba sic Abilities Test for a period of five years. More

specifically, the notice claimed that the Petitioner had

submitted or caused to be submitted an altered grade on the

Basics Abilities Test (BAT) in order to register for a Basic

Recruit Training Program at Miami - Dade College. The Petitioner

submitted an Election of Rights that disputed the allegations

and requested a formal hearing. The matter was then forwarded

to the Division of Administrative Hearings for formal

proceedings on December 5, 2003.

Aft er numerous delays and continuances requested by the

parties, the case went to hearing on January 5, 2005. At that

time, the Respondent presented testimony from the Petitioner,

Melinda Griffin, Carmen Banos, James Connolly, Donna Jennings,

and Tom Hood. Petitioner’s Exhibit 1 and Respondent’s Exhibits

3 - 7 were admitted into evidence.

The Respondent requested official recognition for the items

identified as Respondent’s Exhibits 1 and 2. The request was

granted. The transcript of the case was filed o n January 21,

2005. Thereafter, the Petitioner requested an extension of the

time to file a proposed recommended order. The request was

granted. All parties were granted leave until February 4, 2005,

to file proposed recommended orders. Only the Respon dent filed

a Proposed Recommended Order. It has been considered in the

preparation of this Recommended Order.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Petitioner is an applicant to become a corrections

officer. As such, she was required to take and pass the BAT as

a pre requisite to the Corrections Officer Basic Recruit Training

course. It was Petitioner’s intention to take the requisite

course offered at Miami - Dade College.

2. The Respondent is the state agency responsible for the

licensing and certification of all cor rections officers.

3. On February 7, 2002, the Petitioner took the BAT for

corrections officers. The Petitioner scored a 58 percent on the

BAT and was given a “fail.” In order to pass the BAT, a score

of 68 percent must be achieved. Those who fail the BAT may

retake the test not sooner than 30 days after the original test

administration date.

4. According to the Petitioner, she did not understand

that she had failed the BAT. Petitioner alleged that two men

who she thought worked for Miami - Dade Count y advised her that

she had passed the examination. More specifically, the men told

Petitioner of the need for Haitian corrections officers and they

promised to help her obtain employment as a corrections officer.

In return, the Petitioner was to pay the men a certain amount of

money as compensation for their help.

5. In truth, the men were not connected to Miami - Dade

County. There is no evidence that such individuals were

authorized to procure Haitians such as this Petitioner for

employment as correctio ns officers. Moreover, the test results

that they furnished to Petitioner, which she then gave to Miami -

Dade College, represented she had taken the BAT on March 7,

2002.

6. Petitioner did not take the examination on March 7,

2002. The BAT results date d March 7, 2002 represented

Petitioner had achieved a “pass” on the test.

7. Petitioner knew or should have known that a test date

of March 7, 2002, was not accurate or possible since she did not

take the BAT on that date. Additionally, she should have

realized that the only test date that could be stated as her own

was February 7, 2002 as that was the only date Petitioner took

the BAT.

8. In order to register for the corrections officer basic

recruit course at Miami - Dade College, Petitioner gave the BAT

results with the March 7, 2002, date to the registering agent.

The March 7, 2002, “pass” result did not accurately reflect the

Petitioner’s performance on the BAT.

9. The Petitioner maintains that the two men who sought

her money in exchange for t heir help in obtaining the

corrections officer job perpetrated any wrongdoing and that she

was an innocent dupe in their plot. Neither of the individuals

testified in this case, and according to Petitioner, their

whereabouts is unknown.

10. The Petition er turned in the March 7, 2002, BAT

results in order to register for the basic recruit course.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

11. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of these

proceedings. §§ 120.569, an d 120.57(1), Fla. Stat. (2004).

12. Section 943.17(1)(g), Florida Statutes (2004),

provides that the Respondent:

(g) Assure that entrance into the basic

recruit training program for law

enforcement, correctional, and correctional

probation officers be l imited to those who

have passed a basic skills examination and

assessment instrument, based on a job task

analysis in each discipline and adopted by

the commission.

13. In this case, the Petitioner registered for the Basic

Recruit Training Course in rel iance on a BAT result that was

erroneous. Petitioner knew she did not take the BAT on March 7,

2002. Submitting a test result from that date was impossible

since Petitioner did not take the BAT on that date. The BAT

results had been altered to reflect t he March 7, 2002 test date

and a passing score. While Petitioner may not have realized the

passing score was altered, she could have readily discovered

that the test date was incorrect. Had she questioned the BAT

sheet before turning it in she would have avoided the instant

dispute. Instead, Petitioner chose to submit a BAT document

that she knew or should have known was not accurate.

14. Florida Administrative Code Rule 11B - 35.0011 specifies

that applicants (such as Petitioner) shall not possess altere d

BAT documents and shall not engage in conduct that attempts to

subvert the BAT process. It is evident the Petitioner possessed

erroneous and altered BAT results. The rule further specifies

that applicants who violate the provision must wait five years

to re - take the BAT. In this case, the Petitioner has

demonstrated no credible explanation for why she possessed the

erroneous BAT results or why she registered for the basic

recruit course with a BAT result that clearly indicated an

erroneous test date. Finally, Petitioner has not shown that she

passed the BAT on any date.

15. In this case, the Respondent has demonstrated by clear

and convincing evidence that the Petitioner submitted an altered

BAT result and relied on that BAT in order to register for the

basic recruit course.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Respondent enter a final order

disqualifying the Petitioner from taking the BAT for a period of

five years in accordance with Florida Administrative Code Rule

11B - 35.0011(5).

DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of March, 2005, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

J. D. PARRISH

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The De Soto 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 8th day of March, 2005.

COPIES FU RNISHED :

Michael Ramage, General Counsel

Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 1489

Grace A. Jaye, Esquire

Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 1489

Ronald J. Cohen, Esqu ire

Ronald J. Cohen, P.A.

8100 Oak Lane, Suite 403

Miami Lakes, Florida 33016

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 R ecommended Order should be filed with the agency that

will issue the Final Order in this case.