DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, APPELLANT,
v.
MIRIAM SILVA AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION, APPELLEES
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, APPELLANT,
MIRIAM SILVA AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION, APPELLEES
627 So. 2d 612
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1993)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (the department) appeals from an order of the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) adopting the findings of the hearing officer but mitigating the recommended penalty of dismissal to a ten-day suspension. Although we might have reservations regarding the wisdom of the penalty directed by PERC, we are unable to say that it amounts to an abuse of the discretion granted PERC by section 447.208(3), Florida Statutes (1991). Concluding that the department’s arguments do not merit reversal, we affirm the order under review.
BARFIELD and ALLEN, JJ., concur. BOOTH, J., Dissents with Opinion.
Dissent
BOOTH, Judge,
dissenting:
The hearing officer found that appellee Silva intentionally falsified a public record and that Silva’s actions lead to the issuance of a fraudulent official identification card. The hearing officer also concluded that dismissal was an authorized penalty and that Silva had not carried her burden of demonstrating entitlement to mitigation under section 447.208(3), Florida Statutes. PERC’s decision to mitigate Silva’s dismissal to a ten-day suspension, requiring the Department to continue to employ Silva in the very capacity in which she was acting when she falsified a public record is a clear abuse of discretion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Eduardo S. Mendez, M.D. v. Fla. Dep't OF Health, 943 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…ensed physician and a prohibition against dispensing controlled substances during the probationary period. The Board’s imposition of a penalty is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Silva, 627 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Grimberg v. Dep’t of Prof'l Regulation, Bd. of Med., 542 So. 2d 457, 457 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (“The appellate function, on review of penalties imposed by an administrative agency, is to determine whether there are valid reasons in…
-
Davis v. Dep't OF Bus. & Prof'l, 957 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…We review an administrative order to determine whether there is competent substantial evidence to support it. See Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc. v. Clark, 668 So. 2d 982 (Fla.1996); Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Silva, 627 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Here, the facts were not disputed, an informal hearing was accorded to Mr. Davis, and the administrative order was well within the authority of the Board. We note as well that Mr. Davis elected to proceed with an informal hearin…
-
Galvan v. Dep't of Health (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…agency’s findings of fact is that of “competent, substantial evidence.” § 120.68(7)(b), Fla. Stat. (2012). The Board’s imposition of a penalty is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Silva, 627 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Grimberg v. Dep’t of Prof’l Regulation, Bd. of Med., 542 So. osteopathic physician, a licensed podiatric physician, or a licensed dentist; and the teaching of general principles of health and wellness to the public and to stude…