WAKECOUNTY
JAMES VINSON DEWBERRY,
Petitioner,
v.
NORTH CAROLINA ALARM SYSTEMS LICENSING BOARD,
Respondent. / ))))))))))) / IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
11 DOJ 7649
PROPOSAL FOR DECISION
This contested case was heard before Administrative Law JudgeDonald W. Overby on June 28, 2011, in Raleigh,North Carolina.
APPEARANCES
Petitioner appeared pro se
Respondent was represented by attorney M. Denise Stanford.
ISSUES
Whether sufficient grounds exist for Respondent to deny Petitioner’s application for alarm registration permit based on Petitioner’s lack of good moral character or temperate habits.
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; 74D-6; 74D-8; 74D-10; 12 NCAC 11.0300.
WITNESSES
Petitioner – The following witness testified on behalf of Petitioner: Shawn Bradley, Petitioner’s supervisor. Petitioner testified on his own behalf.
Respondent – Alarm Systems Licensing Board Deputy Director Anthony Bonapart testified for Respondent Board.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.Respondent Board is established pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 74D-4, et seq., and is charged with the duty of licensing and registering individuals engaged in the alarm systems business.
2.Petitioner applied to Respondent Board for an alarm registration permit.
3.By application dated March 25, 2010, Petitioner applied for an alarm registration. (Respondent’s Exhibit 2). On Respondent’s Exhibit 2, Petitioner answered “no” to the following question: “Have you ever pled guilty or been convicted of any crime (Felony or Misdemeanor)?” Respondent received Petitioner’s application on March 25, 2010.
4.Submitted with his application for an alarm registration permit, Petitioner supplied a background check, showing no criminal convictions.
5.A criminal record search from ForsythCounty revealed that Petitioner had been charged with assault on a female on May 31, 2010 and was convicted of the charge on August 26, 2010. (Respondent’s Exhibit 3).
6.By letter dated April 1, 2011, Respondent denied Petitioner’s alarm registration “For Cause” based on the above criminal conviction. (Respondent’s Exhibit 4).
7.Petitioner testified that the conviction arose out of an incident between himself and his 83 year old mother-in-law. His mother-in-law came to his house when his older daughter was upstairs sleeping. He claims that his mother-in-law wanted to fight him and in order to diffuse the situation he struck her with his open palm. She fell to the floor with blood oozing out of her head. Soon after, he helped her back up and gave her the glasses that had fallen off her face.
8.Petitioner’s Supervisor, Shawn Hunt, of General Security in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, testified to the moral character of Mr. Dewberry. He noted that Mr. Dewberry is a very professional individual, and he trusts Mr. Dewberry because he has always handled himself well.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1.Pursuant to G.S. § 74D-6(3), Respondent Board may refuse to issue an alarm systems registration permit for lack of good moral character or temperate habits.
2.Pursuant to G.S. § 74D-6(3), convictions for offenses involving moral turpitude or convictions for acts of violence constitute prima facie evidence of an applicant’s lack of good moral character or temperate habits.
3.Respondent Board presented evidence of Petitioner’s lack of good moral character or temperate habits through Petitioner’s criminal record.
4.Petitioner has failed to rebut the presumption that he lacks good moral character.
PROPOSAL FOR DECISION
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the undersigned proposes that Respondent REVERSE its initial decision to deny Petitioner’s application for alarm registration and grant the alarm registration after a three month denial period. The three month denial period shall be stayed for one year and the registration shall be issued on a one year probationary status.
ORDER
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, North Carolina, 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 ___ day of July, 2011.
______
Donald W. Overby
Administrative Law Judge
A copy of the foregoing was mailed to:
James Vinson Dewberry
4351 Becks Parks Lane
Winston Salem, NC 27106
PETITIONER
M. Denise Stanford
Bailey & Dixon, LLP
PO Box 1351
Raleigh, NC 27602
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
This the 20th day of July, 2011.
______
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 MailServiceCenter
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
(919) 431 3000
Fax: (919) 431-3100
1