DAVID R. KELLY, APPELLANT,
v.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court reversed the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission's revocation of Kelly's certificate because the agency failed to comply with statutory requirements for rejecting a hearing officer's findings of fact.
An agency must either accept a hearing officer's findings of fact or provide a determination and statement that the findings lack competent substantial evidence or that proceedings violated essential legal requirements.
[1] An administrative agency must either accept a hearing officer's findings of fact or issue a final order containing a determination and statement that the findings are not…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavid R. Kelly's law enforcement certificate was revoked by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, which rejected the Division of Adm…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Administrative Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
David R. Kelly appeals an order of the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission which revoked his certificate. In his initial brief, appellant has argued that the commission’s order violated section 120.57(l)(b)10., Florida Statutes (1987), in that the agency rejected a Division of Administrative Hearings hearing officer’s findings of fact without a determination and a statement 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. In the answer brief, counsel for appellee candidly con cedes he is unable to refute the arguments of appellant.
Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 9.315(b), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we reverse and remand to the agency with directions to issue a final order that accepts the hearing officer’s findings of fact. See Howard Johnson Co. v. Kilpatrick, 501 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Tuveson v. Florida Governor’s Council on Indian Affairs, 495 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), review denied, 504 So. 2d 767 (Fla.1987); Heifetz v. Department of Business Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, 475 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
SMITH, C.J., and MILLS and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mel Heifetz v. Dep't of Bus. Reg., 475 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Tuveson v. Fla. Governor's Council ON Indian Affairs, Inc., 495 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Howard Johnson Co. v. Kilpatrick, 501 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)