STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
COUNTY OF WAKE 01 DOJ 0352
EDWARD JAMES SUMMERS, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) PROPOSAL FOR DECISION
)
NORTH CAROLINA ALARM )
SYSTEMS LICENSING BOARD, )
)
Respondent. )
)
______)
This contested case was heard before Senior Administrative Law Judge Fred G. Morrison Jr. on May 29, 2001, in Raleigh, North Carolina.
APPEARANCES
Petitioner appeared pro se.
Respondent was represented by attorney Charles F. McDarris.
ISSUES
Whether grounds exist for the North Carolina Alarm Systems Licensing Board to deny Petitioner’s application for an alarm registration permit for lack of good moral character and temperate habits.
BURDEN OF PROOF
Respondent has the burden of proving that Petitioner’s application for an alarm registration permit should be denied. Petitioner may rebut Respondent’s showing.
EXHIBITS
Petitioner introduced no exhibits.
Respondent introduced the following:
Exhibit A: Petitioner’s application
Exhibit B: Petitioner’s Criminal Record Check
Exhibit C: Denial Letter issued to Petitioner
WITNESSES
Petitioner - Petitioner testified on his own behalf.
Respondent - Investigator Helen Parker testified for the Board.
STATUTES AND RULES APPLICABLE
TO THE CONTESTED CASE
Official notice is taken of the following statutes and rules applicable to this case:
N.C.G.S. 74D-2
N.C.G.S. 74D-6
N.C.G.S. 74D-8
N.C.G.S. 74D-9
N.C.G.S. 74D-10
12 NCAC 11 '' .0100, .0200, .0300.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Petitioner applied for an alarm registration permit on September 11, 2000.
2. The Board’s investigator, Helen Parker (hereinafter Investigator Parker), performed a standard background check on Petitioner.
3. Investigator Parker determined that Petitioner, on May 31, 2000, received a Prayer for Judgment Continued on a speeding ticket in Wake County; on October 8, 1998, was convicted of reckless driving to endanger in Harnett County; and on October 30, 1997, was convicted of possession of drug paraphernalia in Harnett County.
4. Petitioner testified that he is twenty-one (21) year olds. He graduated from high school and completed three (3) semesters of college level education. He is no longer in school but plans to attend a community college to raise his grade point average so he can re-enroll in a four year college.
5. Petitioner has moved back home with his parents to save money. He is currently unemployed.
2
6. Petitioner pled guilty to a drug paraphernalia charge on October 30, 1997, when the car he was driving was pulled over and the owner consented to a search. The officer found postal scales in Petitioner’s book bag and marijuana in the backseat. Petitioner testified that did not work at the post office or an office supply store. Petitioner also testified that he did not know that the scales were in his bag.
7. Petitioner was found guilty of reckless driving to endanger on October 8, 1998. Petitioner testified that he was charged with DWI at the accident because there were two empty beer cans in the floorboard of his father’s car; however, those charges were dropped because the officer failed to conduct an alcohol breathalyzer on the Petitioner.
8. Petitioner testified that he has smoked marijuana on occasion, but has not done so since December 31, 2000. Petitioner also testified that he experimented with cocaine and crystal methamphetamine approximately two (2) years ago.
9. Petitioner testified that he made poor decisions in the past, but that he has changed his life and wants to be a positive contributor to society.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Pursuant to G.S. 74D-2(d)(2), the applicant is required to show that he is of good moral character and temperate habits. Conviction for illegal use and possession of a controlled substance, drug or narcotic, is prima facie evidence that Petitioner lacks good moral character or temperate habits.
Pursuant to G.S. 74D-6(3), the Board may deny an application for an unarmed security guard registration permit when the applicant has intemperate habits or lacks good moral character. Conviction for illegal use and possession of a controlled substance, drug or narcotic, is prima facie evidence that petitioner lacks good moral character or temperate habits.
Petitioner exhibited a disregard for the law and a lack of good moral character when he was convicted of possession of drug paraphernalia and reckless driving to endanger. Petitioner’s criminal record evidences his lack of good moral character and temperate habits.
Petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of bad moral character in that he could not point to concrete facts to show he had made significant changes in his life.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned makes the following:
PROPOSAL FOR DECISION
The North Carolina Alarm Systems Licensing Board will make the final decision in this contested case. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is proposed that the Board deny Petitioner’s alarm registration permit application.
ORDER
2
It is hereby ordered that the agency serve a copy of the final decision on the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714, in accordance with G.S. 150B-36(b).
NOTICE
The agency making the final decision in this contested case is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to this proposal for decision, to submit proposed findings of fact, and to present oral and written arguments to the agency pursuant to G.S. 150B-40(e).
The agency that will make the final decision in this contested case is the North Carolina alarm Systems Licensing Board.
This the 13th day of June, 2001.
______
Fred G. Morrison Jr.
Senior Administrative Law Judge
2