11-001272PL
Department Of Health, Board Of Physical Therapy vs.
Marly Delis Cueto, P.T.
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Tuesday, July 19, 2011.
Recommended Order on Tuesday, July 19, 2011.
1STATE OF FLORIDA
4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
8DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF )
14PHYSICAL THERAPY PRACTICE , )
18)
19Petitioner, )
21) Case No s . 1 1 - 1271 PL
31vs. ) 11 - 1272PL
36)
37MARLY DELIS CUETO , P.T . , )
43)
44Respondent. )
46)
47RECOMMENDED ORDER
49This case came before Administrative Law Judge John G. Van
59Laningham for final hearing by video teleconference on May 17 ,
692011, at sites in Tallahassee and Miami, Florida.
77APPEARANCES
78For Petitioner: Greg S. Marr , Esquire
84John B. Fricke , Esquire
88S. J. DiConcilio, Esquire
92Department of Health
954052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C - 65
103Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265
108For Respondent: James M. Barclay, Esquire
114Clark, Partington, Hart, Larry,
118Bond & Stackhouse
121106 East College Avenue, Suite 600
127Tallahassee , Florida 32516
130Javier Talamo, Esquire
133Kravitz & Talamo, LLP
1377600 West 20th Avenue, Suite 213
143Hialeah, Florida 33016 - 1894
148STATEMENT OF THE ISSU ES
153The issue s in this case are whether Respondent: (a) was
164c onvicted of a crime which directly relates to the practice of
176physical therapy; (b) failed to timely report a criminal
185conviction to the Board of Physical Therapy Practice; and (c)
195was terminated from the Medicaid program, as Petitioner has
204alleged; and, i f one or more of these allegations are
215established, whether the Board should impose discipline on
223Respondent's physical therapy license within the applicable
230penalty guidelines or take some other action.
237PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
239On October 21 , 200 9 , Petit ioner Department of Health issued
250a two - count Administrative Complaint against Respondent Marly
259Delis Cueto, P.T. The Department alleged that Ms. Cueto had
269been convicted of a crime which directly relate s to the practice
281of physical therapy, and that she had failed to report this
292conviction to the Board of Physical Therapy Practice within 30
302days after it occurred, as the law requires. On April 21, 2010,
314the Department issued a second Administrative Complaint against
322Ms. Cueto, in which she was charged wi th having been terminated
334for cause from further participation as an enrolled Medicaid
343provider.
344In response to each complaint, Ms. Cueto timely requested a
354formal h earing , and on March 11, 2011 , the Department filed the
366pleadings with the Division of Admi nistrative Hearings . Upon
376receipt, the matters were docketed, respectively, as Case Nos.
38511 - 1271PL (involving the two - count complaint) and 11 - 1272PL
398(involving the one - count complaint), and an Administrative Law
408Judge was assigned to preside in them . By order dated March 28,
4212011, these two cases were consolidated for all purposes,
430including the final hearing.
434The final hearing took place as scheduled on May 17, 2011,
445with both parties present. The Department called as witnesses
454Michael R. Coleman, Jenn ifer Wenhold, Horace L. Dozier, and
464William S. Quillen, Ph.D . In addition, Petitioner ' s Exhibits 1
476through 4 and 7 wer e received in evidence. 1 (Petitioner's
487Exhibit 5 was not offered and those identified as 2A and 6 were
500withdrawn.)
501Ms. Cueto testified on h er own behalf and presented no
512other witnesses. Respondent's Exhibits 1 through 7 were
520admitted into evidence .
524The one - volume final hearing transcript was filed on
534June 1 1 , 2011 . The time for submitting p roposed r ecommended
547o rders was enlarged to June 30, 2011, on Ms. Cueto's unopposed
559motion . Each party met this deadline, and their respective
569Proposed Recommended Order s have been considered .
577FINDINGS OF FACT
5801 . At all times relevant to this case, Respondent Marly
591Delis Cueto ("Cueto"), P.T ., w as licensed as a physical
604therapist in the s tate of Florida .
6122. Petit ioner Department of Health (" Department " ) has
622regulatory jurisdiction over licensed physical therapists such
629as Cueto . In particular, the Department is authorized to file
640and prosecu te an administrative complaint against a physica l
650therapist , as it has done in this instance, when a panel of the
663Board of Physical Therapy Practice ("Board") has found that
674probable cause exists to suspect that the therapist has
683committed a disciplinable offense. Exercising its prosecutorial
690authority, t he Department has charged Cueto with three such
700offense s , namely, being convicted of a crime which directly
710relates to the practice of physical therapy; failing to report
720this conviction to the Board; and being terminated from the
730state Medicaid program .
7343 . It is undisputed that, on November 5, 2008 , in a case
747styled State of Florida v. Cueto , No. 08 - 16209CF10A , the Circuit
759Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward
769County, Florida , a ccepted Cueto's plea of nolo contendere to the
780single count of grand theft (a third - degree felony) with which
792she had been charged; withheld adjudication of guilt; and
801sentenced her to a term of two years' probation with special
812conditions. The conditions were that Cueto pay the Agency for
822Health Care Administration ("AHCA") $28,000 as restitution to
833the Medicaid program, from which she had stolen funds; and that
844she relinquish her Medicare and Medicaid provider numbers while
853on probation.
8554. Cueto did n ot explain the reasons for, and
865circumstances surrounding , her plea of nolo contendere. There
873is , at bottom, no persuasive evidence in the record upon which
884to base any findings of an exculpatory nature concerning the
894underlying criminal charge for which Cueto was sentenced.
902Where, as here, there is insufficient proof of objectively
911reasonable grounds for entering a plea of no contest, which are
922consistent with innocence, the undersigned presumes that the
930licensee entered the plea because of a guilty cons cience or in
942surrender to overwhelming odds of conviction. Thus, it is
951determined that Cueto's plea of nolo contendere constituted a
960conviction.
9615 . T he conduct which gave rise to Cueto 's conviction is
974relevant only for the limited purpose of determining whether the
984crime directly relates to the practice of physical therapy . In
995this regard, the undersigned finds that during the period from
1005January 1, 2007 to April 22, 2008, Cueto ÏÏ who, as a licensed
1018physical therapist, was an enrolled Medicaid provider ÏÏ k nowingly
1028and intentionally submitted multiple claims to the Florida
1036Medicaid program for physical therapy services that she had not
1046actually rendered, on which false claims she was paid at least
1057$28,000 to which she was not entitled. It is determined that
1069Cueto was convicted of a crime which directly relates to the
1080practice of physical therapy.
10846. Cueto did not report to the Board that fact that she
1096had pleaded nolo contendere to a crime, as she was legally
1107required to do within 30 days after entering the plea.
11177. On September 30, 2009, AHCA entered a Final Order
1127terminating Cueto from participation as a provider in the
1136Florida Medicaid program. AHCA imposed this sanction against
1144Cueto pursuant to Florida Administrative Code Rule 59G - 9.070 (8)
1155(2008) ÏÏ a s it was authorized to do under section 409.913 (13) ,
1168Florida Statutes (2009) ÏÏ because she had been convicted of grand
1179theft on November 5, 2008. As of the final hearing in this
1191case, Cueto had not been reenrolled as a Medicaid provider.
1201CONCLUSIONS OF LA W
12058 . The Division of Administrative Hearings has personal
1214and subject matter jurisdiction in this proceeding pursuan t to
1224s ections 120.569, and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (201 1 ) .
12359 . A proceeding, such as this one, to suspend, revoke, or
1247impose other disc ipline upon a license is penal in nature.
1258State ex rel. Vining v. Fl a . Real Estate Comm ' n , 281 So. 2d 487,
1275491 (Fla. 1973). Accordingly, to impose discipline, the
1283Department must prove the charges against Cueto by clear and
1293convincing evidence. Dep ' t of Banking & Fin., Div. of Sec. &
1306Investor Prot . v. Osborne Stern & Co. , 670 So. 2d 932, 933 - 34
1321(Fla. 1996)(citing Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292, 294 - 95
1333(Fla. 1987)); Nair v. Dep ' t of Bus . & Pro f ' l Reg . , Bd. of Med . ,
1354654 So. 2d 205, 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
136310 . Regarding the standard of proof, in Slomowitz v.
1373Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), the court
1385developed a " workable definition of clear and convincing
1393evidence " and found that of necessity such a definition would
1403need to contain " both qualitative and quantitative standards. "
1411The court held that:
1415clear and convincing evidence requires that
1421the evidence must be found to be credible;
1429the facts to which the witnesses testify
1436must be distinctly remembered; the testimony
1442must be precise and explicit and the
1449witnesses must be lacking in confusion as to
1457the facts in issue. The evidence must be of
1466such weight that it produces in the mind of
1475the trier of fact a firm belief or
1483conviction, without hesitancy, as to the
1489truth of the allegations sought to be
1496established.
1497Id. The Florida Supreme Court later adopted the Slomowitz
1506court ' s description of clear and convincing evidence. See In re
1518Davey , 645 So. 2d 398, 404 (Fla. 1994). The First District
1529Court of Appeal also has followed the Slomow itz test, adding the
1541interpretive comment that " [a]lthough this standard of proof may
1550be met where the evidence is in conflict, . . . it seems to
1564preclude evidence that is ambiguous. " Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
1572v. Shuler Bros., Inc. , 590 So. 2d 986, 988 (Fl a. 1st DCA 1991),
1586rev . denied , 599 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1992)(citation omitted).
159611 . In Count One of the Administrative Complaint which
1606initiated Case No. 11 - 1271PL , the Department charged Cueto under
1617s ection 4 86.125 (1)(c), Florida Statutes (2008) , 2 which p rovides
1629in pertinent part as follows:
1634(1) The following acts constitute grounds
1640for denial of a license or disciplinary
1647action . . . :
1652* * *
1655(c) Being convicted or found guilty of, or
1663entering a plea of nolo contendere to,
1670rega r dless of adjudicat ion, a crime in any
1680jurisdiction which directly relates to the
1686practice of physical therapy or to the
1693ability to practice physical therapy . The
1700entry of a plea of nolo contendere shall be
1709considered a conviction for purpose [ sic ] of
1718this chapter.
17201 2 . The evidence prove s clearly and convincingly that
1731Cueto entered a plea of nolo contendere to a crime that is
1743directly relate d to the practice of physical therapy . She was
1755not tried and found guilty of the crime, however, nor was she
1767adjudicated guilty of grand theft.
17721 3 . Generally speaking, "[i]n the eyes of the law a person
1785is not deemed to have committed a crime until an adjudication of
1797guilt has been entered against him." Holland v. Fla. Real
1807Estate Comm'n , 352 So. 2d 914, 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)(real
1818estate agent who had pleaded nolo contendere to, and been found
1829guilty of, the felony charge of gross fraud could not
1839subsequently be disciplined for having "[b]een guilty of a
1848crime" because the court had withheld adjudication). Section
18564 8 6 .125 (1)(c) at tempts to override this general principle by
1869equating a no contest plea with a conviction.
187714 . In Ayala v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg. , 478 So. 2d 1116
1890(Fla. 1st DCA 1985), the court considered the question of
1900whether section 458.331(1)(c), Florida Statutes (198 3) ÏÏ to which
1910section 460.413(1)(c) is ide ntical except that it refers to the
1921practice of physical therapy instead of medicine ÏÏ was
1930unconstitutional for creating a conclusive presumption of guilt
1938on the predicate fact of a no contest plea. Rather than deci de
1951the constitutional issue, however, the court instead elected to
1960interpret the statute in a way that would "allow it to withstand
1972constitutional attack." Id. at 1118. Announcing its holding,
1980the court wrote:
1983We find that section 458.331(1)(c) is
1989clearl y constitutional by construing the
1995word "shall" in the last sentence of that
2003subsection as permissive rather than
2008mandatory in meaning. Rich v. Ryals , 212
2015So. 2d 641, 643 . As so construed, the Board
2025of Medical Examiners may presumptively
2030consider the nol o contendere plea as
2037evidence of a conviction for purposes of
2044chapter 458; however, in accordance with the
2051Supreme Court's opinion in The Florida Bar
2058v. Lancaster , 448 So. 2d 1019 , the Board
2066must allow appellant the opportunity to
2072rebut this presumption an d assert his
2079innocence of the underlying criminal charges
2085by explaining the reasons and circumstances
2091surrounding his plea of nolo contendere, and
2098thereby attempt to convince the Board that
2105he is not guilty of a crime in violation of
2115the provisions of sect ion 458.331(1)(c) .
2122The Board must consider this evidence in
2129deciding appellant's guilt or innocence for
2135purposes of the disciplinary charges. Such
2141explanation may, of course, always be
2147considered in mitigation of punishment if
2153appellant should be adjudic ated guilty by
2160the Board.
2162Id. at 1118 - 19. See also Dep't of Health v. Higginbotham , Case
2175No. 10 - 2796PL, 2011 Fla. Div. Adm. Hear. LEXIS 106 ( Fla. DOAH
2189May 11, 2011).
219215. Ayala says , in short, that the Department is entitled
2202to rely on a presumption , which arises from the no contest plea,
2214that the respondent was convicted of a crime for which
2224administrative discipline may be imposed. The presumption is
2232rebuttable, however, and thus the respondent must be allowed to
"2242assert his innocence" of the crim e ÏÏ not, significantly, by
2253proving his innocence (although the option of proving that his
2263conduct did not violate the criminal law should be open to the
2275respondent), but rather by proving the circumstances surrounding
2283his plea and the reasons for entering s uch a plea, which
2295evidence then must be considered in determining whether the
2304respondent is guilty of the disciplinable offense.
231116. As a matter of fact, as found above, Cueto failed to
2323rebut the Ayala presumption. The evidence shows clearly and
2332convi ncingly that she was in fact "convicted" of a crime which
2344directly relates to the practice of physical therapy.
2352Therefore, Cueto is guilty of the offense described in s ection
2363486.125 (1)(c).
236517. In Count Two of the Administrative Complaint which
2374initiate d Case No. 11 - 1271PL , the Department charged Cueto under
2386s ection 456.072(1)(x ), Florida Statutes (2008), which states as
2396follows:
2397Failing to report to the board, or the
2405department if there is no board, in writing
2413within 30 days after the licensee has been
2421convicted or found guilty of, or entered a
2429plea of nolo contendere to, regardless of
2436adjudication, a crime in any jurisdiction
2442[shall constitute grounds for discipline] .
2448Convictions, findings, adjudications, and
2452pleas entered into prior to the enactment o f
2461this paragraph must be reported in writing
2468to the board, or department if there is no
2477board, on or before October 1, 1999.
2484Cueto failed to report her conviction to the Board as required.
2495She is therefore guilty of the offense described in s ection
2506456.0 72(1)(x ) .
251018. In the Administrative Complaint which initiated Case
2518No. 11 - 1272PL , the Department charged Cueto under s ection
2529456.072(1)(kk ), Florida Statutes (2009), which provides:
2536Being terminated from the state Medicaid
2542program pursuant to s. 409.913, any other
2549state Medicaid program, or the federal
2555Medicare program [shall constitute grounds
2560for discipline], unless eligibility to
2565participate in the program from which the
2572practitioner was terminated has been
2577restored.
2578Cueto was in fact terminated from the state Medicaid program
2588pursuant to section 409.913, and she had not been reenrolled
2598therein at the time of the final hearing in this case. She is
2611therefore guilty of the offense defined in s ection
2620456.072(1)(kk ), Florida Statutes (2009).
262519. Cueto c ontends that she was not terminated from
2635Medicaid "for cause" as the Department has alleged. S ection
2645456.072(1)(kk ) does not require, as a prerequisite to imposing
2655discipline, that the Medicaid provider have been terminated for
2664cause. Nevertheless, Cueto was terminated for cause, that being
2673her conviction for grand theft, which crime relates to the
2683practice of physical therapy. At the time AHCA terminated
2692Cueto's participation as an enrolled provider, the penalty
2700guidelines then in effect for violations of Medicaid - related
2710laws required that the sanction of termination be imposed for a
2721violation of section 409.913(13 ) (b) , which statute directs AHCA
2731to immediately terminate the participation of a Medicaid
2739provider who has been convicted of a crime relating to the
2750practice of the provider's profession. See Fla. Admin Code R.
276059G - 9.070(8)(a)2. (2008). The same rule defined "termination"
2769as "a twenty - year preclusion from any action that results in a
2782claim for payment to the Medicaid program as a result of
2793fu rnishing, supervising a person who is furnishing, or causing a
2804person to furnish goods or services." Fla. Admin Code R. 59G -
28169.070(2)(y).
281720. The Department might have alleged that Cueto's
2825termination had been for cause because under the Board's current
2835disciplinary guidelines, which took effect on June 30, 2010, a
2845termination for cause from the Medicaid program warrants a
2854harsher penalty than does a termination "not . . . for cause."
2866Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B17 - 7.001(1)(ff)(2010). Although this
2875Board rul e does not define "cause," AHCA's current disciplinary
2885guidelines, which became effective on September 7, 2010, provide
2894that a "termination pursuant to this rule is also called a 'for
2906cause' or 'with cause' termination." Fla. Admin. Code R. 59G -
29179.070(3)(p )(2010). Neither rule , however, applies in this case,
2926which must be decided under the disciplinary guidelines in
2935effect at the time the offense was committed. See Orasan v. Ag.
2947for Health Care Admin. , 668 So. 2d 1062, 1063 (Fla. 1st DCA
29591996); Willner v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg. , 563 So. 2d 805, 806
2971(Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
297521. Cueto was convicted of a crime relating to the
2985practice of physical therapy in November 2008. Under the then
2995applicable disciplinary guidelines, t he range of penalties for a
3005first o ffense involving s ection 48 6 . 125 (1)(c) , when the
3018underlying crime was a felony, is from " a minimum of fine of
3030$5,000 and two years probation, up to a fine of $10,000 and/or
3044revocation . " Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B17 - 7.001(1)(c)(2007).
305322. Cueto's failure to report her conviction to the Board
3063within 30 days occurred in December 2008. Under the then
3073applicable disciplinary guidelines, t he range of penalties for a
3083first offense involving s ection 4 56 . 072(1)(x) is "from a minimum
3096fine of $1,000 and/or a letter o f concern, up to a maximum fine
3111of $3,000 and/or one month suspension of license followed by two
3123years of probation." Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B17 -
31327.001(1)(x)(2007).
313323. Cueto was terminated from the Medicaid program in
3142September 2009. Rule 64B17 - 7.001 (20 07), which was in effect at
3155that time, does not prescribe a punishment for the offense
3165defined in section 456.072(1)(kk ), Florida Statutes (2009).
3173Cueto can be sanctioned for this offense, however, through
3182section 486.125(1)(k), Florida Statutes (2009), w hich , as the
3191Department alleged in the Administrative Complaint, provides
3198that a violation of chapter 456 is grounds for discipline.
320824. Under the disciplinary guidelines in effect in
3216September 2009, t he range of penalties for a first offense
3227involving s e ction 486.125(1)(k) is "from a minimum fine of
3238$1,000 and/or a letter of concern, up to a maximum fine of
3251$5,000 and/or suspension of license for two years followed by
3262two years of probation." Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B17 -
32727.001(1)(x)(2007).
32732 5 . Rule 64B17 - 7 .001(2)(2007) provides that, in applying
3285the penalty guidelines, the following aggravating and mitigating
3293circumstances are to be taken into account:
3300( a) The danger to the public;
3307(b) The number of distinct charges;
3313(c) The actual damage, physical or
3319ot herwise, to the patient(s);
3324(d) The length of time since the date of
3333the last violation(s);
3336(e) The length of time that the licensee
3344has held a license in any jurisdiction;
3351(f) The deterrent effect of the penalty
3358imposed;
3359(g) Rehabilitation efforts of the licensee
3365including remorse, restitution, and
3369corrective action(s);
3371(h) The effect of the penalty on the
3379licensee ' s livelihood;
3383(i) Efforts of the licensee to report or
3391stop violations or the failure of the
3398licensee to correct or stop violations;
3404(j) The willfulness and/or negligence of
3410the licensee pertaining to any violation;
3416(k) Any other mitigating or aggravating
3422circumstances.
3423The undersigned concludes that consideration of the aggravating
3431and mitigating factors leads to a wash . Thus, an appro priate
3443penalty should fall squarely within the prescribed range.
345126 . The Department has propose d that Cueto's license be
3462revoked and that s he be required to pay an administrative fine of
3475$10,000 . Although t his penalty comes within the applicable
3486range o f penalties and hence is within the Board's discretion to
3498impose, it is harsher than necessary to protect the public .
3509RECOMMENDATION
3510Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
3520Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Board of Physical Therapy
3530Practi ce enter a final order finding Marly Delis Cueto guilty of
3542the offense described in s ection 48 6.125 (1)(c), Florida
3552Statutes , i.e., being convicted of a crime that directly rela te s
3564to the practice of physical therapy; guilty of the offense
3574defined in sectio n 456.072(1)(x), namely failing to timely
3583report a criminal conviction to the Board; and guilty of the
3594offense defined in section 486.125(1)(k), in consequence of
3602having been terminated from the Medicaid program, which latter
3611constitutes a disciplinable of fense under section
3618456.072(1)(kk) . It is further RECOMMENDED that the Board impose
3628an administrative fine of $1 4 ,000 and suspend Cueto's physical
3639therapy license for two years, to be followed by two years of
3651probation on such reasonable terms and conditi ons as the Board
3662establish es , which may include the requirement that Cueto pay in
3673full the $28,000 she has been ordered to remit to AHCA as
3686restitution of the stolen funds .
3692DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of Ju ly , 20 1 1 , in
3705Tallahassee, Leon County, Florid a.
3710S
3711___________________________________
3712JOHN G. VAN LANINGHAM
3716Administrative Law Judge
3719Division of Administrative Hearings
3723The DeSoto Building
37261230 Apalachee Parkway
3729Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060
3734(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675
3742Fax Filing (850) 921 - 68 47
3749www.doah.state.fl.us
3750Filed with the Clerk of the
3756Division of Administrative Hearings
3760this 19th day of Ju ly , 20 1 1 .
3770ENDNOTES
37711 / Petitioner's Exhibit 7 is Dr. Quillen's curriculum vitae,
3781which the Department was permitted to submit after the final
3791hearing. Before filing this CV, the Department had marked it
3801for identification as Petitioner's Exhibit 1. The undersigned
3809renumbered the document so that no two Petitioner's Exhibits
3818would bear the same number.
38232 / Additionally, or in the alternative, the Department charged
3833Cueto under section 486.125(1)(k)(violating any provision of
3840chapter 486 or chapter 456 subjects licensee to pu nishment),
3850alleging that her no contest plea was disciplinable pursuant to
3860section 456.073(1)(c), which m akes it an offense to enter a plea
3872of guilty or nolo contendere to a crime relating to the practice
3884of the licensee's profession. The undersigned need not decide
3893in this case whether it is legally permissible to charge a
3904physical therapist under section 4 56.073(1)(c) ÏÏ a general
3913statute which applies without apparent limitation to all
3921licensed health care providers ÏÏ as an alternative to charging
3931the therapist under section 486.125(1)(c), which is a specific
3940statute applicable only to licensed physical thera pists. See
3949B.D.M. Fin. Corp. v. Dep't of Bus. & Pro f 'l Reg. , 698 So. 2d
39641359, 1362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)(agency erred in revoking
3973registration under statu t e generally authorizing "affirmative
3981action" to enforce law because another statute having more
3990rigoro us criteria specifically addressed revocations); Sheils v.
3998Jack Eckerd Corp. , 560 So. 2d 361, 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)(in
4010action against pharmacy for damages, shorter limitation period
4018specifically applicable to professional malpractice claims
4024controlled ove r longer period governing products liability
4032actions generally because "where a general law that applies to
4042numerous classes of cases conflicts with the law that applies
4052only to a particular class, the latter, or more specific law,
4063generally controls . . . ."). The outcome here happens to be
4076the same under either section. At any rate, moreover, Cueto's
4086criminal conviction constitutes but a single disciplinable "act"
4094for which she cannot fairly receive multiple administrative
4102punishments. Cf. Syder v. Sta te , 921 So. 2d 871, 873 (Fla. 4th
4115DCA 2006)(Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits the government from
4123securing multiple criminal convictions based on same conduct).
4131COPIES FURNISHED :
4134Greg S. Marr , Esquire
4138John B. Fricke , Esquire
4142S. J. DiConcilio, Esquire
4146Department of Health
41494052 Bald Cyp ress Way, Bin C - 65
4158Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265
4163James M. Barclay, Esquire
4167Clark, Partington, Hart, Larry,
4171Bond & Stackhouse
4174106 East College Avenue, Suite 600
4180Tallahassee, Florida 32516
4183Javier Talamo, Esquire
4186Kravitz & Talamo, LLP
41907600 West 20th Avenue, Suite 213
4196Hialeah, Florida 33016 - 1894
4201Allen Hall , Executive Director
4205Board of Physical Therapy Practice
421040 5 2 Bald Cypress Way , Bin C - 05
4220Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3255
4225Nicholas W. Romanello, General Counsel
4230Department of Health
42334052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin A - 02
4241Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1701
4246NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
4252All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
426215 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions
4273to this Recommended Order should be file d with the agency that
4285will issue the Final Order in this case.
- Date
- Proceedings
- PDF:
- Date: 12/06/2011
- Proceedings: Marly Cueto's Notice of Prejudicial Error, Notice of Hearing, Motion to Recuse Fl Bd of Physical Therapy, Motion to Impound Prejudicial ex parte Documents, Motion for Attorney Fees and Motion for Sanctions filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/06/2011
- Proceedings: Respondent Marly Cueto's Opposition to Department's Exception to Recommended Order filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/06/2011
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Responses to Respondent's Exceptions to Recommended Order filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 07/19/2011
- Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/30/2011
- Proceedings: Respondent Marly Cueto's Proposed Recommended Order (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 06/13/2011
- Proceedings: Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 06/13/2011
- Proceedings: Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders filed.
- Date: 06/06/2011
- Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings (not available for viewing) filed.
- Date: 05/17/2011
- Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
- PDF:
- Date: 05/17/2011
- Proceedings: Final Hearing Exhibit - Petitioner's Exhibit 1 (exhibit not available for viewing) filed.
- Date: 05/11/2011
- Proceedings: Respondent's Marly Delis Cueto's Exhibits (exhibits not available for viewing)
- PDF:
- Date: 05/10/2011
- Proceedings: Letter to Claudia Llado from Greg Marr regarding exhibits 1-5, intended to be offered into evidence (exhibits not available for viewing) filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 05/09/2011
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Opposition to Respondent's Motion to Reschedule Final Hearing filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 05/09/2011
- Proceedings: Motion to Reschedule Final Hearing (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/22/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (of W. Quillen; filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/21/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (of H. Dozier; filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/20/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (of J. Wenhold; filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/20/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (of A. Hall; filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/19/2011
- Proceedings: Mary Delis Cueto's Response to Requests for Admission (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/19/2011
- Proceedings: Mary Delis Cueto's Response to Request for Production (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/19/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Intent to Offer Evidence Under Section 90.803(6)(a), Florida Statutes-Department of Health Licensing File filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/08/2011
- Proceedings: Amended Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for May 17 and 18, 2011; 9:00 a.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL; amended as to Dates).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/06/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Change in Law Firm Affiliation, Address, and Contact Information (filed in Case No. 11-001272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 04/06/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Change in Law Firm Affiliation, Address, and Contact Information filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/05/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for May 17, 2011; 9:00 a.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 03/28/2011
- Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 11-1271PL, and 11-1272PL).
- PDF:
- Date: 03/17/2011
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Notice of Method of Recording Testimony at Final Hearing filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 03/16/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner's Request for Production, Interrogatories, and Request for Admission to Respondent filed.
Case Information
- Judge:
- JOHN G. VAN LANINGHAM
- Date Filed:
- 03/11/2011
- Date Assignment:
- 03/14/2011
- Last Docket Entry:
- 12/06/2011
- Location:
- Miami, Florida
- District:
- Southern
- Agency:
- ADOPTED IN TOTO
- Suffix:
- PL
Counsels
-
James M. Barclay, Esquire
Address of Record -
Greg S. Marr, Esquire
Address of Record