14-001918RX John Goodman vs. Florida Department Of Law Enforcement Status: Closed DOAH Final Order on Wednesday, July 30, 2014.

Summary: The evidence fails to establish basis to invalidate implied consent rules.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

JOHN GOODMAN,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No. 14 - 1918RX

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

LAW ENFORCEMENT,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

FINAL ORDER

An administrative hearing was he ld June 10 and 11, 2014, in

Tallahassee, Florida, before Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)

William F. Quattlebaum, Division of Administrative Hearings.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Brian A. Newman, Esquire

Pennington, P.A.

215 South Monroe Street, Seco nd Floor

Post Office Box 10095

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 2095

Elizabeth L. Parker, Esquire

The Law Office of Elizabeth Parker, P.A.

Suite 325

515 North Flagler Drive

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 - 4349

For Respondent: Ann Marie Joh nson, Esquire

Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489

2331 Phillips Road

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 1489

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue in this case is whether Florida Administrative

Code Rules 11D - 8.012 and 11D - 8.013 are invalid exe rcises of

delegated legislative authority.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On April 24, 2014, John Goodman (Petitioner) filed a

Petition to Determine the Invalidity of an Existing Rule pursuant

to section 120.56(3), Florida Statutes (2013) . 1/

On April 25, 2014, a Notice of Hearing was issued scheduling

the administrative hearing to commence on May 23, 2014. On

April 30, 2014, the Respondent filed an Agreed Motion for

Continuance, and the hearing was rescheduled for June 10

through 12, 2014.

On June 6, 2014, the parties filed a Joint Pre - Hearing

Stipulation containing a statement of admitted facts. The

stipulated facts have been adopted and are incorporated herein.

At the hearing, the Petitioner presented the testimony of

four witnesses and had Exhibits 2 throu gh 7 and 16 through 18

admitted into evidence. The Respondent presented the testimony

of two witnesses and had Exhibits 7 and 8 admitted into evidence.

The T ranscript of the hearing was filed on June 30, 2014.

On July 10, 2014, the parties filed p roposed f inal o rders that

have been considered in the preparation of this Final O rder.

Although r ule 11D - 8.011 approves both gas chromatography and

alcohol dehydrogenase (enzymatic) analytical methods for blood

alcohol testing and r ule 11D - 8.013 references both methods, no

forensic laborator y in Florida conduct s blood alcohol test ing by

the enzymatic method, and the F indings of F act set forth herein

are applicable only to gas chromatography headspace analysis.

FINDING S OF FACT

1. The Petitioner has been charge d with ÐDUI

Manslaughter/Failed to Render AidÑ and ÐVehicular Homicide/Failed

to Give Information or Render AidÑ in Palm Beach County, Circuit

Court Case No. 502010CF005829AXXXMB.

2. The prosecution in the criminal case intends to offer

the results of a blood alcohol test performed on blood collected

from the Petitioner as evidence at the trial.

3. The Petitioner has moved to exclude the blood alcohol

test results from the trial based, in part, on the method used to

collect his blood for forensic test ing.

4. The Respondent is the state agency responsible for

implementing the ÐImplied ConsentÑ blood alcohol testing program,

including the adoption of rules. The Respondent has adopted

such rules which are set forth in Florida Administrative Code

Chapt er 11D - 8.

5. The Petitioner has asserted that the RespondentÓs

ÐImplied ConsentÑ rules are insufficient to ensure the scientific

reliability of the blood alcohol test results to be offered

against him in the criminal trial.

6. On March 21, 2014, the circuit court judge presiding in

the criminal trial entered an Order Granting StateÓs Motion to

Invoke the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction, which specifically

directed the Petitioner to file a petition challenging r ule

11D - 8.012 with the Division of Admin istrative Hearings.

7. On April 24, 2014, the Petitioner filed a Petition to

Determine the Invalidity of an Existing Rule , challenging r ules

11D - 8.012 and 11D - 8.013 as invalid exercises of delegated

legislative authority.

8. The parties stipulated th at the Petitioner is

substantially affected by, and has standing to challenge the

validity of, r ules 11D - 8.012 and 11D - 8.013.

9. Rule 11D - 8.002 provides the following relevant

definitions:

(2) Accuracy - the nearness of a

measurement to a known concent ration.

* * *

(4) Agency - a law enforcement agency other

than the Department, or an entity which

conducts breath tests or submits blood

samples for alcohol testing pursuant to

these rules, or a civilian entity performing

such duties on behalf of a law enforcement

agency.

* * *

(7) Alcohol - ethyl alcohol, also known as

ethanol.

* * *

(10) Analyst - a person who has been issued

a permit by the Department to conduct blood

alcohol analyses.

(11) Approved Blood Alcohol Test - th e

analyses of two separate portions of the

same blood sample using a Department -

approved blood alcohol test method and a

Department - approved procedure, with results

within 0.010 grams of alcohol per 100

milliliters of blood (g/100mL), and reported

as the b lood alcohol level.

* * *

(14) Blood - whole blood.

(15) Blood Alcohol Level - the alcohol

concentration by weight in a personÓs blood

based upon grams of alcohol per 100

milliliters of blood (g/100mL).

* * *

(19) Department - the Flo rida Department of

Law Enforcement.

* * *

(22) Methods - types of alcohol analyses

approved by the Department to conduct

chemical or physical tests of blood or

breath.

* * *

(24) Permit - when issued by the

Department, certifies that the holder has

met all necessary qualifications, remains in

full compliance with these rules and is

authorized to perform all related duties.

A permit is issued only to a qualified

applicant and remains valid and in full

effect until determined otherwise by t he

Department.

Rule 11D - 8.012

10. The Petitioner has asserted that r ule 11D - 8.012 is an

invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because the

rule does not establish a venipuncture procedure regulating

needle gauge and tourniquet usage by whic h blood is obtained for

the purpose of performing a blood alcohol test. At the same

time, the Petitioner asserts, and the Respondent agrees, that the

Respondent lacks statutory authority to adopt such a rule.

11. Rule 11D - 8.012 provides as follows:

Bl ood Samples - Labeling and Collection.

(1) Before collecting a sample of blood,

the skin puncture area must be cleansed with

an antiseptic that does not contain alcohol.

(2) Blood samples must be collected in a

glass evacuation tube that contains a

p reservative such as sodium fluoride and an

anticoagulant such as potassium oxalate or

EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid).

Compliance with this section can be

established by the stopper or label on the

collection tube, documentation from the

manufacture r or distributor, or other

evidence.

(3) Immediately after collection, the tube

must be inverted several times to mix the

blood with the preservative and

anticoagulant.

(4) Blood collection tubes must be labeled

with the following information: nam e of

person tested, date and time sample was

collected, and initials of the person who

collected the sample.

(5) Blood samples need not be refrigerated

if submitted for analysis within seven (7)

days of collection, or during

transportation, examination or analysis.

Blood samples must be otherwise

refrigerated, except that refrigeration is

not required subsequent to the initial

analysis.

(6) Blood samples must be hand - delivered or

mailed for initial analysis within thirty

days of collection, and must be initially

analyzed within sixty days of receipt by the

facility conducting the analysis. Blood

samples which are not hand - delivered must be

sent by priority mail, overnight delivery

service, or other equivalent delivery

service.

(7) Notwithstandin g any requirements in

Chapter 11D - 8, F.A.C., any blood analysis

results obtained, if proved to be reliable,

shall be acceptable as a valid blood alcohol

level.

Specific Authority 316.1932(1)(a)2., (f)1.,

322.63(3)(a), 327.352(1)(b)3., (d) FS.

Law Impl emented 316.1933(2)(b), 316.1934(3),

322.63(3)(b), 327.352(1)(e), 327.353(2),

327.354(3) FS.

12. Commercially available kits, generally containing glass

evacuation tubes, a non - alcohol skin wipe, and a 21 - gauge needle

assembly, may be used to collect sa mples for blood alcohol

test ing . The RespondentÓs rules do not require usage of such

kits, and the components of the kits are commonly available where

blood collection is performed.

13. The Legislature identified the persons authorized to

collect sample s for blood alcohol testing in s ection

316.1933(2)(a) , Florida Statutes, which states as follows:

Only a physician, certified paramedic,

registered nurse, licensed practical nurse,

other personnel authorized by a hospital to

draw blood, or duly licensed clinical

laboratory director, supervisor,

technologist, or technician, acting at the

request of a law enforcement officer, may

withdraw blood for the purpose of

determining the alcoholic content thereof or

the presence of chemical substances or

controlled substances therein. However, the

failure of a law enforcement officer to

request the withdrawal of blood shall not

affect the admissibility of a test of blood

withdrawn for medical purposes.

14. The Petitioner asserts that the gauge of the needle

used to puncture a vein for blood collection and improper

application of a tourniquet during the collection process can

result in ÐhemolysisÑ of blood and an inaccurate blood alcohol

test result.

15. As noted above, r ule 11D - 8.002(14) defines ÐbloodÑ to

mean Ðw hole blood.Ñ

16. Whole blood is comprised of four components, including

white cells, red cells, platelets , and plasma.

17. Hemolysis is the release of the contents of red blood

cells (hemoglobin) into blood plasma.

18. Hemolysis can occur from a vari ety of causes ,

including, but not limited to, the manner of collection

(regardless of the gauge of the needle used to puncture the

vein), improper agitation of a sample in the collection tube, and

storage of a sample.

19. All blood alcohol testing perfor med by forensic

laboratories in Florida is conducted through Ðgas chromatography

headspace analysis.Ñ

20. Extensive testimony was presented at the hearing as to

the process of gas chromatography headspace analysis. The

reliability and accuracy of the ga s chromatography headspace

analysis process is not at issue in this proceeding.

21. Gas chromatography headspace analysis involves the

removal and testing of a subsample of the blood sample contained

in a collection tube.

22. A subsample taken from a s ample that exhibits hemolysis

contains all of the components present at the time of collection

and is whole blood.

23. The evidence fails to establish that hemolysis alters

the concentration of alcohol within a subsample taken from a

sample of whole bloo d.

24. The evidence fails to establish that hemolysis affects

the results of a blood alcohol test performed on whole blood by

gas chromatography headspace analysis.

Rule 11D - 8.013

25. Rule 11D - 8.013 governs the issuance of permits to

analysts conductin g blood alcohol tests, including a requirement

that analysts define the method and procedures to be followed in

conducting the tests.

26. The Petitioner has asserted that the rule is an invalid

exercise of delegated legislative authority because the rule does

not explicitly require analysts performing a blood alcohol test

to identify and/or exclude an ÐunreliableÑ blood sample from the

testing process. Essentially, the Petitioner argues that samples

exhibiting hemolysis or coagulation should not be analy zed for

alcohol content.

27. Rule 11D - 8.013 provides as follows:

Blood Alcohol Permit - Analyst.

(1) The application for a permit to

determine the alcohol level of a blood

sample shall be made on a form provided by

the Department and shall include th e

following information:

(a) Name and address of applicant;

(b) A copy of state license if licensed, or

college transcript;

(c) Name and address of employer and

laboratory facility where applicant performs

analyses;

(d) Identify at least on e Agency for which

blood analyses are to be performed pursuant

to Chapters 316, 322, and 327, F.S.; and,

(e) A complete description of proposed

analytical procedure(s) to be used in

determining blood alcohol level.

(2) Qualifications for blood anal yst

permit - To qualify, the applicant must meet

all of the following requirements:

(a) Department approval of analytical

procedure(s). All proposed analytical

procedures will be reviewed and a

determination of approval will be made by

the Department;

(b) Satisfactory determination of blood

alcohol level in five proficiency samples

provided by the Department using the

proposed analytical procedure. Satisfactory

determination shall be made by reporting

results for blood alcohol proficiency

samples within the acceptable range for the

samples. For blood alcohol testing,

acceptable ranges shall mean the calculated

proficiency sample mean or - 3 standard

deviations iterated twice. The mean and

standard deviations will be calculated using

the results reported by the analysts and

reference laboratories;

(c) Identify at least one Agency for which

blood analyses are to be performed pursuant

to Chapters 316, 322, and 327, F.S.; and,

(d) Meet one of the following:

1. Possess a clinical laborato ry license in

clinical chemistry as a technologist,

supervisor or director, under Chapter 483,

F.S.; or

2. Be a licensed physician pursuant to

Chapter 458, F.S.; or

3. Complete a minimum of 60 semester credit

hours or equivalent of college, at leas t 15

semester hours of which must be in college

chemistry.

(3) The department shall approve gas

chromatographic analytical procedures and

enzymatic analytical procedures based on

alcohol dehydrogenase which meet the

following requirements:

(a) Inclu des the approved method used and a

description of the method, and the

equipment, reagents, standards, and controls

used;

(b) Uses commercially - prepared standards

and controls certified by the manufacturer,

or laboratory - prepared standards and

controls verified using gas chromatography

against certified standards. For

commercially - prepared standards and

controls, the manufacturer, lot number and

expiration date must be documented for each

sample or group of samples being analyzed.

For laboratory - prepar ed standards and

controls, date, person preparing the

solution, method of preparation and

verification must be documented;

(c) A statement of the concentration range

over which the procedure is calibrated. The

calibration curve must be linear over the

stated range;

(d) Uses a new or existing calibration

curve. The new calibration curve must be

generated using at least three (3)

standards: one at 0.05 g/100mL or less, one

between 0.05 and 0.20 g/100mL (inclusive)

and one at 0.20 g/100mL or higher, and must

be verified using a minimum of two (2)

controls, one at 0.05 g/100mL or less and

one at 0.20g/100mL or higher. The existing

calibration curve must be verified using a

minimum of two (2) controls, one at 0.05

g/100mL or less and one at 0.20g/100m L or

higher;

(e) Includes the analysis of an alcohol -

free control, and the analysis of a whole

blood or serum control. The whole blood or

serum control may be used to satisfy the

control requirement(s) in paragraph (d);

(f) A gas chromatographic a nalytical

procedure must discriminate between

methanol, ethanol, acetone and isopropanol

and employ an internal standard technique;

(g) An enzymatic analytical procedure based

on alcohol dehydrogenase must use the

procedure recommended by the instrumen t

manufacturer/test kit vendor for whole blood

alcohol analysis, and the enzyme used must

have sufficient selectivity to provide

negligible cross - reactivity towards

methanol, acetone and isopropanol.

(4) The permit shall be issued by the

Department for a specific method and

procedure. Any substantial change to the

method, analytical procedure, or laboratory

facility must receive prior approval by the

Department before being used to determine

the blood alcohol level of a sample

submitted by an agency. The Department

shall determine what constitutes a

substantial change.

(5) An analyst shall only use a Department -

approved procedure to determine the blood

alcohol level of samples submitted by an

agency. Approval of blood alcohol analysis

methods and pr ocedures shall be based on

rule requirements in effect at the time they

were submitted for approval.

Specific Authority 316.1932(1)(a)2., (f)1.,

316.1933(2)(b), 316.1934(3) 322.63(3)(b),

327.352(1)(b)3. FS.

Law Implemented 316.1932(1)(b),

316.1933(2)( b), 316.1934(3), 322.63(3)(b),

327.352(1)(b), (e), 327.353(2), 327.354(3)

FS.

28. Analysts submit the procedures referenced in the rule

in the form of written Ðstandard operating proceduresÑ (SOP)

filed with the Respondent. No SOP was admitted into th e record

of the hearing.

29. As set forth above, the evidence fails to establish

that hemolysis affects the results of a blood alcohol test

performed on whole blood by gas chromatography headspace

analysis. A subsample taken from a sample that exhibits

hemolysis contains all of the components present at the time of

collection and is whole blood. Accordingly, the evidence fails

to establish that a sample exhibiting hemolysis should be

excluded from testing.

30. Notwithstanding the requirement in r ule 1 1D - 8.012 that

glass evacuation tubes containing a preservative and an

anticoagulant be used in the collection process, a collection

tube containing a blood sample submitted for testing can, on

occasion, include coagulated blood.

31. Coagulation can occur for a variety of reasons ,

including the type of needle used in the collection process or

the failure to mix the sample properly with the anticoagulant

contained in the tube.

32. Rule 11D - 8.002(15) defines Ðblood alcohol levelÑ as

Ðthe alcohol concentrat ion by weight in a personÓs blood based

upon grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood (g/100mL).Ñ

33. The entire sample in a collection tube containing a

portion of coagulated blood contains all of the components that

were present in the Ðwhole bloo dÑ of the subject from whom the

blood was collected. However, coagulation causes some of the

blood components to solidify.

34. Alcohol (ethanol) is water - soluble. Coagulation alters

the ratio of liquid to solid in the sample and can increase the

concen tration of alcohol in the liquid portion of the sample.

35. The evidence fails to establish that the mere presence

of coagulation inevitably precludes the withdrawal of a subsample

that properly reflects the components of the whole blood

contained in the collection tube.

36. Because gas chromatography headspace analysis uses a

subsample of the liquid portion of the sample, the accuracy of

the blood alcohol level reported by the subsample is related to

the degree of coagulation present in the sample.

C ONCLUSIONS OF LAW

37. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this

proceeding. § 120.56, Fla . Stat .

38. This case commenced on the filing by the Petitioner of

a Petition to Determine the Invalid ity of an Existing Rule

pursuant to s ection 120.56(3), which provides as follows:

CHALLENGING EXISTING RULES; SPECIAL

PROVISIONS. -

(a) A substantially affected person may

seek an administrative determination of the

invalidity of an existing rule at any time

during the existence of the rule. The

petitioner has a burden of proving by a

preponderance of the evidence that the

existing rule is an invalid exercise of

delegated legislative authority as to the

objections raised.

(b) The administrative law judge may

declare all or part of a rule invalid. The

rule or part thereof declared invalid shall

become void when the time for filing an

appeal expires. The agency whose rule has

been declared invalid in whole or part shall

give notice of the decisio n in the Florida

Administrative Register in the first

available issue after the rule has become

void.

39. The Petitioner has asserted that r ules 11D - 8.012

and 11D - 8.013 are invalid exercises of delegated legislative

authority. To the extent that the pa rties have attempted to

raise issues beyond whether the referenced rules are invalid

exercises of delegated legislative authority, such issues are

outside the scope of this proceeding and have not been

considered.

40. Section 120.52(8) provides the follo wing relevant

definition:

ÐInvalid exercise of delegated legislative

authorityÑ means action that goes beyond the

powers, functions, and duties delegated by

the Legislature. A proposed or existing

rule is an invalid exercise of delegated

legislative aut hority if any one of the

following applies:

(a) The agency has materially failed to

follow the applicable rulemaking procedures

or requirements set forth in this chapter;

(b) The agency has exceeded its grant of

rulemaking authority, citation to wh ich is

required by s. 120.54(3)(a)1.;

(c) The rule enlarges, modifies, or

contravenes the specific provisions of law

implemented, citation to which is required

by s. 120.54(3)(a)1.;

(d) The rule is vague, fails to establish

adequate standards for age ncy decisions, or

vests unbridled discretion in the agency;

(e) The rule is arbitrary or capricious.

A rule is arbitrary if it is not supported

by logic or the necessary facts; a rule is

capricious if it is adopted without thought

or reason or is irra tional; or

(f) The rule imposes regulatory costs on

the regulated person, county, or city which

could be reduced by the adoption of less

costly alternatives that substantially

accomplish the statutory objectives.

A grant of rulemaking authority is nec essary

but not sufficient to allow an agency to

adopt a rule; a specific law to be

implemented is also required. An agency may

adopt only rules that implement or interpret

the specific powers and duties granted by

the enabling statute. No agency shall ha ve

authority to adopt a rule only because it is

reasonably related to the purpose of the

enabling legislation and is not arbitrary

and capricious or is within the agencyÓs

class of powers and duties, nor shall an

agency have the authority to implement

stat utory provisions setting forth general

legislative intent or policy. Statutory

language granting rulemaking authority or

generally describing the powers and

functions of an agency shall be construed to

extend no further than implementing or

interpreting t he specific powers and duties

conferred by the enabling statute.

41. In a challenge to an existing agency rule, the

Petitioner has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the

evidence that the existing rule is an invalid exercise of

delegated legisl ative authority as to the objections raised.

§ 120.56(3)(a), Fl a. Stat.

Rule 11D - 8.012

42. The Petitioner has asserted that r ule 11D - 8.012 is an

invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because the

rule does not establish a specific venipunct ure procedure by

which blood is obtained for the purpose of performing a blood

alcohol test.

43. The Respondent has not proposed rules that would

regulate needle gauge and tourniquet usage, and both parties

agree that the Respondent lacks statutory autho rity to adopt such

rules. The issue of whether the Respondent has the authority to

adopt such rules is outside the scope of this proceeding.

44. The omission from the rule of a requirement related to

needle gauge and tourniquet usage is of no material c onsequence.

The evidence fails to establish that hemolysis alters the

concentration of alcohol in blood tested through gas

chromatography headspace analysis. Accordingly, the evidence

fails to provide a basis to invalidate r ule 11D - 8.012.

45. This Fina l Order does not address the alleged impact of

hemolysis on the results of blood alcohol testing through the

enzymatic analytical procedure because there is no evidence that

any forensic laboratory in Florida utilizes such a procedure.

Rule 11D - 8.013

46. The Petitioner has asserted that r ule 11D - 8.013 is an

invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because the

rule does not explicitly require an analyst to identify,

document, and exclude ÐunreliableÑ blood samples from the testing

process.

47. Because the evidence fails to establish that hemolysis

impacts the measurement of blood alcohol levels, the omission

from the rule of a requirement to exclude samples exhibiting

hemolysis from testing does not provide a basis to invalidate the

rule.

48. The evidence presented at the hearing establishes that

analysts routinely examine and document the condition of samples

as a matter of standard laboratory practice. The omission of

such a requirement does not provide a basis to invalidate the

rule.

49. The evidence establishes that coagulation in a sample

may result in elevation of the blood alcohol level reported by a

subsample subjected to gas chromatography headspace analysis.

However, the accuracy of a blood alcohol test report derived from

a sample that exhibits coagulation depends on whether the

subsample taken from the sample is an appropriate representation

of the components of the whole blood contained in the collection

tube. The evidence fails to establish that the mere presence of

coagulated blood in a sample inherently precludes the withdrawal

of an appropriate subsample.

50. It should be noted that a rule requiring exclusion from

testing of all samples exhibiting any level of coagulation could

result in the denial of potentially exculpator y evidence to an

individual whose test results were measured at 0.05 or less,

despite some degree of coagulation having been present in the

individualÓs sample. See § 316.1934(2)(a), Fla. Stat.

51. The RespondentÓs rules require that blood alcohol tests

be conducted using Ðwhole blood.Ñ Reference to the assorted

statutes implemented by, and identified herein with, the

challenged rules clearly demonstrate that blood alcohol tests are

to be performed Ðsubstantially in accordanceÑ with the

RespondentÓs rul es. Determination of whether a blood alcohol

test was performed Ðsubstantially in accordanceÑ with the

RespondentÓs rules requires a case - specific inquiry and is an

issue within the jurisdiction of a trial court. The omission of

a requirement to exclude such samples from testing fails to

provide a basis to invalidate rule 11D - 8.013.

ORDER

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is ORDERED that the Petition filed by the Petitioner in

this case pursuant to s ection 120.56(3), Flor ida Statutes, and

seeking a determination that Florida Administrative Code Rules

11D - 8.012 and 11D - 8.013 are invalid exercises of delegated

legislative authority, is hereby DISMISSED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of July , 2014 , in

Tallahassee, Leon Cou nty, 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 30th day of July , 2014 .

ENDNOTE

1/ Unless otherwise noted, all statutory references are to

Florida Statutes (2013).

COPIES FURNISHED:

Ken Plante, Coordinator

Joi nt Administrative Procedures

Committee

Room 680, Pepper Building

111 West Madison Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1400

( eServed )

Liz Cloud, Program Administrator

Administrative Code

Department of State

R.A. Gray Building, Suite 101

Tallahassee, Flori da 32399 - 0250

( eServed )

Geral d M. Bailey, Commissioner

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 1489

( eServed )

Thomas Kirwin, General Counsel

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 1489

Tallah assee, Florida 32302 - 1489

( eServed )

Elizabeth L. Parker, Esquire

The Law Office of Elizabeth Parker, P.A.

Suite 325

515 North Flagler Drive

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 - 4349

Ann Marie Johnson, Esquire

Department of Law Enforcement

Post Office Box 148 9

2331 Phillips Road

Tallahassee, Florida 3230 2 - 1489

Brian A. Newman, Esquire

Pennington, P.A.

215 South Monroe Street, Second Floor

Post Office Box 10095

Tallahassee, Florida 32302 - 2095

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW

A party who is adversely aff ected by this Final Order is entitled

to judicial review pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes.

Review proceedings are governed by the Florida Rules of Appellate

Procedure. Such proceedings are commenced by filing the original

notice of administra tive appeal with the agency clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings within 30 days of rendition

of the order to be reviewed, and a copy of the notice,

accompanied by any filing fees prescribed by law, with the clerk

of the District Court of Appeal in the appellate district where

the agency maintains its headquarters or where a party resides or

as otherwise provided by law.