13-004336PL Department Of Health, Board Of Nursing vs. Santana Lashonda Williams, L.P.N. Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, February 24, 2014.

Summary: Respondent disciplined for inappropriate use of patient information.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

BOARD OF NURSING ,

Petitioner ,

vs. Case No. 13 - 4336PL

SANTANA LASHONDA WILLIAMS,

L.P.N. ,

Respondent .

/

RECOMMENDED ORDER

An administrative hearing in this case was held by video

teleconference on January 17, 2013, in Tampa and Tallahassee,

Florida, before William F. Quattlebaum, Administrative Law Judge,

Division of Administrative Hearings.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Casie M arye Barnette, Esquire

Louise Wilhite - St . Laurent, Esquire

Department of Health

4052 Bald Cypress Way , Bin C - 65

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265

For Respondent: Kristian Eiler Dunn, Esquire

Dickens and Dunn, P.L.

5 17 East College Avenue

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 - 2528

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue in this case is whether the allegations set forth

in the Amended Administrative Complaint filed by the Department

of Health (Petitioner), against Santana Lashon da Williams, L.P.N.

(Respondent) , are correct, and, if so, what penalty should be

imposed.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By an Administrative Complaint dated August 23, 2013, the

Petitioner alleged that the Respondent violated sections 456.072

and 464.018, Florida Statutes (2013). 1/ The Respondent disputed

the allegations and requested an administrative hearing. The

Petitioner forwarded the request to the Division of

Administrative Hearings , which scheduled and conducted the

hearing.

On December 16, 2013, the P etitioner moved for leave to file

an Amended Administrative Complaint, and the Motion was granted

on that date.

On January 7, 2014, the parties filed a Joint Pre - Hearing

Stipulation containing a statement of admitted facts that have

been incorporated her ein as necessary.

The case was transferred to the undersigned Administrative

Law Judge on January 8, 2014.

At the hearing, the Petitioner presented the testimony of

eight witnesses and had Exhibits 1 , 2, 4 , 5, 7, 9, 15 , and 16

admitted into evidence. The Respondent presented no testimony or

exhibits.

A T ranscript of the hearing was filed on January 27, 2014.

Both parties filed proposed recommended orders that have been

considered in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

FINDING S OF FACT

1. T he Petitioner is the state agency charged by statute

with regulating the practice of nursing.

2. At all times material to this case, the Respondent was

licensed as a practical nurse in the State of Florida, holding

license n o. PN 5195962, with an addres s of record at 7255 Bucks

Ford Drive, Riverview, Florida 33578.

3. Between July 2012 and June 2013, the Respondent was

employed as a licensed practical nurse by Armor Correctional

Health Services, Inc. (Armor).

4. At all times material to this case, pe rsons employed by

Armor, including the Respondent, provided health services to

" patients " (inmates) incarcerated in detention facilities

operated by the H illsborough County Sheriff's Office (H CSO ) ,

including the Falkenburg Road Jail.

5. The HCSO utilize s a computerized jail management system

( " JAMS " ) that, in relevant part, stores personal and medical data

for each inmate incarcerated in the HCSO detention facilities.

6. Personal data stored in JAMS includes names, birthdates

and social security numbers . The HCSO treats inmate social

security numbers as confidential and private. The names and

birthdates of inmates incarcerated in HCSO detention facilities

are published online and are available to the public through the

HCSO website.

7. Medical data stored in JAMS is confidential and includes

screening information obtained by a registered nurse upon an

inmate ' s initial arrival to a detention facility, as well as

information about inmate health issues that are presented during

incarceration.

8. Lice nsed practical nurses working at the Falkenburg Road

Jail can access JAMS through computer terminals at nursing

stations placed in various locations in the facility.

9. At all times material to this case, the Respondent had

access to JAMS and to the rel evant data contained therein.

10. In May 2013, Anthony Collins, an undercover detective

employed by the HCSO, engaged in an investigation of a tax fraud

scheme based on information received from a confidential

informant.

11. Detective Collins testified persuasively at the

hearing, and his testimony is fully credited.

12. The scheme involved using the personal information

(names, birthdates and social security numbers) of inmates

incarcerated in HCSO detention facilities to file fraudulent

federal tax returns and obtain refunds.

13. On May 30, 2013, Detective Collins met with the

Respondent ' s father. During the meeting, the Respondent ' s father

showed Detective Collins a handwritten list of names, birthdates

and apparent social security numbers ( List #1 ). The reverse side

of the document was a blank form titled , " Armor Correctional

Health Services, Inc., Infirmary Shift Report. "

14. During the May 30 meeting, Detective Collins learned

that the Respondent was employed at the Falkenburg Road Jail.

Wi th Detective Collins present, the Respondent ' s father

telephoned someone he represented as the Respondent to discuss

List #1 and its delivery to Detective Collins. Detective Collins

believed the Respondent to be the source of List #1 .

15. HCSO Corporal Kristy Udugawa testified at the hearing

that during the course of the undercover operation, she was

directed to determine whether List #1 revealed personal data of

inmates incarcerated in the Falkenburg Road Jail. Corporal

Udugawa interviewed nine inmates and determined that List #1

disclosed their names, birthdates and social security numbers.

Corporal Udugawa ' s testimony is fully credited.

16. At the hearing, a witness who had been incarcerated in

the Falkenburg Road Jail during the relevant period te stified

credibly that his name, birthdate , and social security number

were on List #1 , and that he had not given consent for the data

to be used in filing a fraudulent tax return.

17. The May 30 meeting ended with an agreement between

Detective Collins a nd the Respondent ' s father to proceed with the

scheme.

18. On May 31, 2013, Detective Collins met with the

Respondent after a series of telephone calls between Detective

Collins, the Respondent , and the Respondent ' s father. Detective

Collins had been di rected to bring a computer and related

equipment to the meeting so as to begin filing tax returns , and

he complied with the instructions.

19. During the May 31 meeting, the Respondent told

Detective Collins that on a weekly basis, she would provide

perso nal information for 20 to 30 individuals that could be used

to file tax returns and that the proceeds of the tax refunds

would be divided evenly between the Respondent and Detective

Collins. She directed him to obtain a prepaid cell phone for use

in arran ging the weekly meeting.

20. During the May 31 meeting, the Respondent advised

Detective Collins that she had access to personal information for

about 3,400 people.

21. The Falkenburg Road Jail houses about 3,400 inmates.

22. During the May 31 meetin g, Detective Collins paid $500

to the Respondent, which she accepted. The Respondent provided

Detective Collins a list of six handwritten names ( List #2 ) , with

birthdates and apparent social security numbers.

23. By deposition, a witness who had been in carcerated at

the Falkenburg Road Jail during the relevant period testified

that List #2 disclosed his name, birthdate , and social security

number , and that he had not given consent for the data to be used

in filing a fraudulent tax return. The testimony is credited.

24. The interaction between the Respondent and Detective

Collins was recorded through the use of electronic audio and

video surveillance equipment.

25. At the conclusion of the May 31 meeting, the Respondent

was arrested by HCSO officers w ho had been monitoring the

surveillance.

26. Deputy Paul Baez, one of the officers participating in

the surveillance monitoring, testified at the hearing that after

having been advised of her " Miranda R ights, " the Respondent

admitted that she had obtaine d personal data of inmates at the

jail and had sold the data. Deputy Baez further testified that

the Respondent admitted " doing drops, " which Deputy Baez

explained involved obtaining the personal data of other people

and selling it for use in fraudulent t ax return filings. Deputy

Baez 's testimony was persuasive and is fully credited.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

27. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this

proceeding. §§ 120.569 & 120.57(1), Fla . Sta t . (2013).

28. In this case, the Petitioner is seeking to impose

discipline against the Respondent ' s license. In order to

prevail, the Petitioner must demonstrate the truthfulness of the

allegations in the Administrative Complaint by clear and

convincin g evidence. Dep 't of Banking & Fin . v. Osborne Stern &

Co . , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996); Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d

292 (Fla. 1987). In order to be " clear and convincing, " the

evidence must be " of such weight that it produces in the mind of

the trie r of fact a firm belief or conviction, without hesitancy,

as to the truth of the allegations sought to be established. "

See Slomowitz v. Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).

In this case, the burden has been met.

29. As set forth in Count I of the Amended Administrative

Complaint, section 464.018(1)(h) authorizes the Petitioner to

impose discipline against a licensee for " unprofessional conduct,

as defined by board rule. " Florida Administrative Code R ule

64B9 - 8.005(4) provides that " stealin g from a patient " constitutes

unprofessional conduct. Rule 64B9 - 8.005(7) provides that

" violating the confidentiality of information or knowledge

concerning a patient " constitutes unprofessional conduct.

30. The evidence establishes that the Respondent, employed

as a nurse in a detention center, engaged in unprofessional

conduct in violation of section 464.018(1)(h), when she obtained

and sold confidential personal data of patients for the purpose

of filing fraudulent federal tax returns and receiving ta x

refunds to which she was not entitled.

31. As set forth in Count II of the Amended Administrative

Complaint, section 464.018(1)(o) authorizes the Petitioner to

impose discipline against a licensee for violating any provision

of chapter 4 5 6 . Section 45 6.072(1)(m) provides that a licensee

may be disciplined for " employing a trick or scheme in or related

to the practice of a profession. "

32. The Respondent had access to inmate personal data

contained in JAMS through her employment as a nurse at the

Falk enburg Road Jail. The evidence establishes that the

Respondent, through her employment, obtained personal data of

others and provided it for use in filing fraudulent federal tax

returns for personal gain, thereby violating sections

456.072(1)(m) and 464.0 18(1)(o).

33. Guidelines for the imposition of discipline in this

case are set forth at rule 64B9 - 8.006.

34. According to the guidelines, the minimum penalty for a

violation of section 464.018(1)(h) and rule 64B9 - 8.005(4) is

revocation of the Responden t ' s license.

35. The guidelines provide that violation of section

464.018(1)(h) and rule 64B9 - 8.005(7) warrants a penalty ranging

from a minimum of reprimand, continuing education and a $250

fine , to a maximum of probation and a $500 fine.

36. The guid elines provide that a violation of section

456.072(1)(m) warrants a penalty ranging from a minimum of

reprimand and a $250 fine , to a maximum of suspension and a

$10,000 fine.

37. Rule 64B9 - 8.006(6) requires the imposition of a $10,000

fine for any offen se involving fraud.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

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

finding the Respondent guilty of the violations set forth herein,

revoking the Respondent ' s licen se as a practical nurse, and

imposing a fine of $10,000.

DONE AND ENTERED this 24th day of February , 2014 , in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675

Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 24th day of February , 2014 .

ENDNOTE

1/ U nless otherwise noted , a ll statutory references are to

Florida Statutes (20 13) , which is the version in effect in both

2012 and 2013 .

COPIES FURNISHED:

Joe Baker, Jr., Executive Director

Board of Nursing

Department of Health

4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C - 02

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3252

Dr. Ann - Lynn Denker, ARNP, Chair

Board of Nursing

Department of Health

4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C - 02

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3252

Jennifer A. Tschetter, General Counsel

Department of Health

4052 Bald Cypre ss Way, Bin A - 02

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1701

Kristian Eiler Dunn, Esquire

Dickens and Dunn, P.L.

517 East College Avenue

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 - 2528

Casie Marye Barnette, Esquire

Louise Wilhite - St . Laurent, Esquire

Department of Health

4052 Bal d Cypress Way , Bin C - 65

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265

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.