CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...ry before affording her a hearing. She argues that as a result of HRS's confirmation of the report and placement of her name in the abuse registry, Centerville terminated her employment. HRS responds that its compliance with its statutory duty under section 415.103(3), Florida Statutes (1989), to classify the report as "confirmed" and report its findings to the central abuse registry did not cause K.M.T....
...his proceeding was under consideration does not reveal, any requirement that a confirmed report of neglect be "judicially determined" before the alleged perpetrator may be disqualified from employment on the basis of the confirmed report. Rather, subsection 415.103(3)(d)3.b., Florida Statutes (1989), states without qualification that: The alleged perpetrator of a confirmed report may be disqualified from working with children or the developmentally disabled or from working in sensitive positions...
...Zimmerman Brush Co.,
455 U.S. 422, 436,
102 S.Ct. 1148, 1158,
71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). See also Fetner v. City of Roanoke,
813 F.2d 1183 (11th Cir.1987) ("Post-deprivation remedies do not provide due process if predeprivation remedies are practicable."). Section
415.103(3)(c), Florida Statutes (1989), provided that, upon completion of the investigation of a report, it should be *871 classified either as "confirmed," "indicated," or "unfounded," and that the alleged perpetrator should be notified of the classification and the right to ask for an amendment or expunction of the record. This subsection also provided that "[c]omputer records of a confirmed report shall be retained for 50 years from the receipt date of the report." The language of section
415.103 in 1989 required that the information relating to a confirmed report be entered in the abuse registry before the alleged perpetrator had the opportunity to contest such report (otherwise, the alleged perpetrator would not be given the...
...306, § 45, Laws of Florida, shows that giving the alleged perpetrator the opportunity for a prior hearing at which he can contest the classification of "confirmed" outweighs any state necessity for quick action or any impracticality of providing a pre-classification hearing. [3] See §§
415.103(3)(c)2,
415.104(2), Fla....
...was deprived of procedural due process under these circumstances. We find it unnecessary to decide whether the 1989 version of the statute is facially unconstitutional, however. We base this conclusion on the fact that the statutory authority for such pre-hearing sanction, Section
415.103(3), Florida Statutes (1989), no longer existed at the time of the final hearing, and we follow the basic principle of jurisprudence that courts will only consider the constitutionality of a statute if the case cannot be resolved on any other basis. See, e.g., Sandlin v. Criminal Justice Standards & Training Comm'n,
531 So.2d 1344, 1346 (Fla. 1988); Singletary v. State,
322 So.2d 551, 552 (Fla. 1975); McKibben v. Mallory,
293 So.2d 48, 51 (Fla. 1974). The 1989 version of section
415.103(3) authorized an employer to terminate the employment of an employee, such as Appellant, who was merely alleged to have perpetrated a confirmed report of abuse or neglect....
...and placing K.M.T.'s name on the abuse registry (the facts which gave rise to Appellant's termination from employment); and by letter dated June 6, 1990, HRS refused to expunge K.M.T.'s name from the abuse registry. On or about August 1, 1990, the amended version of section 415.103 took effect, which eliminated the pre-hearing termination penalty of subsection (3)....
...As stated by the Fourth District, "A statute which eliminates a penalty applies, from the moment it takes effect, to all pending proceedings." Fogg,
473 So.2d at 1355. We conclude, therefore, that the amendment and elimination of the employment-termination provision of the 1989 version of section
415.103(3) removed such provision from the case at bar altogether, meaning that the penalty could not be imposed on K.M.T....
...n or disabled adult, including, but not limited to, food, clothing, medicine, shelter, supervision, and medical services, that a prudent person would deem essential for the *873 well-being of an aged person or disabled adult. (Emphasis added.) Under section 415.103(3)(d)5, Florida Statutes (1989), HRS had the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that K.M.T....
...But the statutory prohibition for employment or the statutory directive to discharge attaches because they go on the abuse registry? A. That's correct. Q. Now, at the time they go on the abuse registry, that occurs before that person has the opportunity to have a hearing. A. That's correct. (T. 154-159). [3] Sections
415.103(3)(c)2 and
415.104(2), Florida Statutes (1990 Supp.), provide that a report shall not be classified as confirmed until HRS has received a final administrative order rendered in a chapter 120 hearing or until the 30-day period provided to the alleged perpetrator for requesting such hearing has expired....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11162, 1992 WL 301308
...before affording her a hearing. She argues that as a result of HRS’s confirmation of the report and placement of her name in the abuse registry, Centerville terminated her employment. HRS responds that its compliance with its statutory duty under section 415.103(3), Florida Statutes (1989), to classify the report as “confirmed” and report its findings to the central abuse registry did not cause K.M.T....
...Zimmerman Brush Co.,
455 U.S. 422, 436 ,
102 S.Ct. 1148, 1158 ,
71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). See also Fetner v. City of Roanoke,
813 F.2d 1183 (11th Cir.1987) (“Post-deprivation remedies do not provide due process if pre-deprivation remedies are practicable.”). Section
415.103(3)(c), Florida Statutes (1989), provided that, upon completion of the investigation of a report, it should be *871 classified either as “confirmed,” “indicated,” or “unfounded,” and that the alleged perpetrator should be n...
...306, § 45, Laws of Florida, shows that giving the alleged perpetrator the opportunity for a prior hearing at which he can contest the classification of “confirmed” outweighs any state necessity for quick action or any impracticality of providing a pre-classification hearing. 3 See §§ 415.103(3)(c)2, 415.-104(2), Fla.Stat....
...was deprived of procedural due process under these circumstances. We find it unnecessary to decide whether the 1989 version of the statute is facially unconstitutional, however. We base this conclusion on the fact that the statutory authority for such pre-hearing sanction, Section
415.103(3), Florida Statutes (1989), no longer existed at the time of the final hearing, and we follow the basic principle of jurisprudence that courts will only consider the constitutionality of a statute if the case cannot be resolved on any other basis. See, e.g., Sandlin v. Criminal Justice Standards & Training Comm’n,
531 So.2d 1344, 1346 (Fla.1988); Singletary v. State,
322 So.2d 551, 552 (Fla.1975); McKibben v. Mallory,
293 So.2d 48, 51 (Fla.1974). The 1989 version of section
415.103(3) authorized an employer to terminate the employment of an employee, such as Appellant, who was merely alleged to have perpetrated a confirmed report of abuse or neglect....
...and placing KM.T.’s name on the abuse registry (the facts which gave rise to Appellant’s termination from employment); and by letter dated June 6, 1990, HRS refused to expunge K.M.T.’s name from the abuse registry. On or about August 1, 1990, the amended version of section 415.103 took effect, which eliminated the pre-hearing termination penalty of subsection (3)....
...As stated by the Fourth District, “A statute which eliminates a penalty applies, from the moment it takes effect, to all pending proceedings.” Fogg,
473 So.2d at 1355 . We conclude, therefore, that the amendment and elimination of the employment-termination provision of the 1989 version of section
415.103(3) removed such provision from the case at bar altogether, meaning that the penalty could not be imposed on K.M.T....
...n or disabled adult, including, but not limited to, food, clothing, medicine, shelter, supervision, and medical services, that a prudent person would deem essential for the *873 well-being of an aged person or disabled adult. (Emphasis added.) Under section 415.103(3)(d)5, Florida Statutes (1989), HRS had the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that K.M.T....
...But the statutory prohibition for employment or the statutory directive to discharge attaches because they go on the abuse registry? A. That’s correct. Q. Now, at the time they go on the abuse registry, that occurs before that person has the opportunity to have a hearing. A. That’s correct. (T. 154-159). . Sections
415.103(3)(c)2 and
415.104(2), Florida Statutes (1990 Supp.), provide that a report shall not be classified as confirmed until HRS has received a final administrative order rendered in a chapter 120 hearing or until the 30-day period provided to the alleged perpetrator for requesting such hearing has expired....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5578, 1991 WL 103427
....C.’s dilantin blood levels *956 for the period from March 27, 1986 to September 7, 1987, constituted a confirmed report of neglect. The Department approved the investigator’s referral report and placed B.B.A. on its central abuse registry under Section 415.103(3)(c), Florida Statutes....
...The recommended order was fully adopted in a final order by the Department, which B.B.A. now challenges on appeal. The Act requires that the Department, among other things, investigate and classify reports of abuse to disabled adults. The procedures for conducting an investigation of a report of abuse are provided for in Section 415.103....
