MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, PETITIONER,
v.
ALVIO DOMINGUEZ, JR., RESPONDENT
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.
Miami-Dade County sought certiorari review of a circuit court decision that reversed the County Manager's termination of an employee convicted of theft. The Florida District Court of Appeal upheld the termination, holding that a guilty verdict constitutes a 'conviction' under County Code § 2-42(22) requiring automatic suspension and forfeiture of position, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld.
A guilty verdict constitutes a 'conviction' under County Code § 2-42(22) even when adjudication of guilt is withheld. Therefore, the County Manager's decision to terminate Dominguez's employment was proper, and the circuit court erred in reversing that decision.
[1] A county ordinance providing for automatic suspension and forfeiture of employment upon a criminal conviction, even with a withheld adjudication, is enforceable.
[2] A finding of guilt by a jury or a plea of guilty constitutes a "conviction" for purposes of employment forfeiture, regardless of whether adjudication of guilt is withheld…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law by: (1) reversing the County Manager's decision denying Dominguez's request for an administrative hearing for the purpose of contesting his discharge from employment with the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department; and (2) reversing the termination of Dominguez's employment because he received a "withhold of adjudication" as to all convictions.”
Establishes the two main errors committed by the circuit court in its reversal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlvio Dominguez, Jr., a Miami-Dade County employee, was tried and found guilty of sixteen counts of stealing thousands of dollars from the County thro…
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 Definition Of 'Conviction' cases and more on FLexlaw
Miami-Dade County (“the County”) petitions this Court for certiorari review of a decision rendered by the appellate division of the circuit court (“circuit court”), which reversed a decision entered by the County Manager. Because we conclude that the circuit court’s decision is a clear departure from the essential requirements of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice, see Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So.3d 1086, 1092 (Fla.2011), we grant the petition and quash the circuit court’s opinion.
Section 2-42(22) of the Miami-Dade County Code provides for the automatic suspension of a County employee who has been charged with a crime, and for an automatic forfeiture of his/her County position if tried, found guilty, and the conviction is not reversed. Additionally, section 2-42(22) specifies that any such person “shall not thereafter be eligible to any such service ... regardless of whether the person is placed on probation or given a suspended sentence.”
Alvio Dominguez, Jr., a County employee, was tried and found guilty of stealing thousands of dollars from the County by fraudulently obtaining reimbursement for tuition charges he never paid. His multiple convictions (sixteen counts) were subsequently affirmed on appeal. State v. Dominguez, 27 So.3d 782, 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). Thus, the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law by: (1) reversing the County Manager’s decision denying Dominguez’s request for an administrative hearing for the purpose of contesting his discharge from employment with the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department; and (2) reversing the termination of Dominguez’s employment because he received a “withhold of adjudication” as to all convictions. See Montgomery v. State, 897 So.2d 1282, 1285 (Fla. 2005) (specifying that a finding of guilt is a “conviction” even though adjudication of guilt is withheld); State v. Gazda, 257 So.2d 242, 243-44 (Fla.1971) (holding that “the term ‘conviction’ means determination of guilt by verdict of the jury or by plea of guilty, and does not require adjudication by the court”); State v. Keirn, 720 So.2d 1085, 1087-88 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (finding *1002that a defendant who “is found guilty by a jury has been ‘convicted’ ... even in the absence of an adjudication”) (citing Smith v. Bartlett, 570 So.2d 360, 361 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)). We therefore grant the County’s petition, and quash the circuit court’s appellate opinion.
Petition granted; opinion quashed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 2010)
- State v. Gazda, 257 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1971)
- Tompkins v. First Union Nat'l Bank, 897 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 2005)
- State v. Keirn, 720 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Aurelian Smith, Jr. v. Bartlett, 570 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- State v. Alvio Dominguez, 27 So. 3d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)