From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Faulknor v. Bd. of Regents of St.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 7, 1988
136 A.D.2d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

January 7, 1988


Petitioner, a registered physician's assistant, was charged with professional misconduct, pursuant to Education Law § 6509 (5) (a) (i), following his conviction upon a plea of guilty of the crime of attempting fraudulently to file, furnish and obtain a diploma purporting to authorize the practice of medicine, a class E felony (Education Law § 6512). A hearing was held before a Regents Review Committee, pursuant to Public Health Law § 230 (10) (m) (iv), at which petitioner appeared with counsel. After the introduction of documentary proof of the conviction, which petitioner did not dispute, petitioner and his attorney made statements seeking to mitigate the penalty. The Regents Review Committee found petitioner guilty of misconduct as charged and recommended that petitioner's registration as a physician's assistant be revoked. Respondent adopted the finding and the recommended penalty, and the Commissioner of Education issued the determination under review.

Petitioner contends that the determination is arbitrary and capricious since there was no hearing or finding on the issue of whether petitioner's conduct had an adverse impact on the practice of his profession. There is, however, undisputed evidence in the record that petitioner was convicted of a crime under the laws of New York and, therefore, he was properly found guilty of professional misconduct (Education Law § 6509 [a] [i]), permitting the imposition of an appropriate penalty (see, Matter of Rubin v Board of Regents, 101 A.D.2d 970, 971). On the question of whether the penalty is inappropriate, this court's scope of review is a limited one (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222), and we see no basis for disturbing the determination imposing a penalty of revocation under the circumstances (see, Matter of Nicholson v Ambach, 80 A.D.2d 690, appeal dismissed 55 N.Y.2d 601; cf., Matter of Mandel v Board of Regents, 250 N.Y. 173). Petitioner's other arguments have no support in the record and, therefore, the determination must be confirmed.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Faulknor v. Bd. of Regents of St.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 7, 1988
136 A.D.2d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Matter of Faulknor v. Bd. of Regents of St.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HERVEL FAULKNOR, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jan 7, 1988

Citations

136 A.D.2d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Matter of Gordon v. Commissioner of Education

The agency is not obliged to document with findings each ruling it makes, especially when the charges are not…