BEFORE THE
STATE
OF FLORIDA
COMMISSION
ON ETHICS
In re BARRY ADRIANCE, )
)
DOAH Case No. 93-1259EC
Respondent. ) Complaint
No. V92-01
)
COE Final Order
No. 94-__
___________________________)
On March 3, 1994, a Hearing Officer from
the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) submitted to the parties and the
Commission her Recommended Order, a copy of which is attached hereto. Neither the Commission's Advocate nor the
Respondent filed exceptions to the Recommended Order. The matter thereafter came before the Commission on Ethics for
final agency action.
This case was submitted to the Commission
on Ethics by Gerald Lewis, Comptroller of the State of Florida, pursuant to
Section 287.175, Florida Statutes. The
Comptroller's report alleged that the Respondent, the former Chief Pilot for
the Florida Highway Patrol, either invited or otherwise permitted persons not
travelling on official State business to fly as passengers on a State aircraft
that he piloted. The report from the
Comptroller was determined to be legally sufficient to allege possible
violations of Section 287.17(1) and 112.313(6), Florida Statutes, and
Commission staff undertook a preliminary investigation to aid in the
determination of probable cause. On
September 10, 1992, the Commission on Ethics issued an order finding probable
cause, and thereafter forwarded this matter to the Division of Administrative
Hearings for conduct of a formal hearing and entry of a recommended order. Thereafter, a formal, evidentiary hearing
was held before the Hearing Officer, a transcript of the hearing was filed, and
the parties then filed proposed recommended orders with the Hearing Officer. The Recommended Order was transmitted to the
Commission and the parties on March 3, 1994, and the parties were notified of
their right to file exceptions to the Recommended Order in accordance with Rule
34-5.022(2), Florida Administrative Code.
Neither the Respondent nor the Commission's Advocate filed exceptions.
Under Section 120.57(1)(b)10, Florida
Statutes, an agency may reject or modify the conclusions of law and
interpretations of administrative rules contained in the recommended
order. However, the agency may not
reject or modify findings of fact made by the Hearing Officer unless a review
of the entire record demonstrates that the findings were not based on
competent, substantial evidence or that the proceedings on which the findings
were based did not comply with the essential requirements of law. See, e.g., Freeze v. Dept. of Business
Regulation, 556 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); and Florida Department
of Corrections v. Bradley, 510 So.2d 1122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Competent, substantial evidence has been
defined by the Florida Supreme Court as such evidence as is "sufficiently
relevant and material that a reasonable mind would accept it as adequate to
support the conclusions reached." DeGroot
v. Sheffield, 95 So.2d 912, 916 (Fla. 1957).
The agency may not reweigh the
evidence, resolve conflicts therein, or judge the credibility of witnesses,
because those are matters within the sole province of the hearing officer. Heifetz v. Dept. of Business Regulation,
475 So.2d 1277, 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Consequently, if the record of the DOAH proceedings discloses any
competent, substantial evidence to support a finding of fact made by the
Hearing Officer, the Commission is bound by that finding.
Findings of Fact
The findings of fact set forth in the
Recommended Order are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein by reference.
1. The
Conclusions of Law set forth in the Recommended Order are approved, adopted,
and incorporated herein by reference.
2. Accordingly,
the Commission on Ethics finds that the Respondent did not violate Sections
287.17(1) and 112.313(6), Florida Statutes, and hereby dismisses this proceeding.
ORDERED by the State of Florida Commission
on Ethics meeting in public session on Thursday, April 21, 1994.
______________________________
Date
______________________________
Joel
K. Gustafson
Chairman
YOU ARE
NOTIFIED THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED PURSUANT TO SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AN ORDER WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS YOU. REVIEW PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED BY FILING A
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL WITH THE APPROPRIATE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL,
AND ARE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE. THE NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE ORDER TO BE REVIEWED.
cc: Mr.
Gene "Hal" Johnson, Attorney for Respondent
Ms.
Virlindia Doss, Commission's Advocate
The
Honorable Gerald Lewis, Comptroller
Division of Administrative Hearings