FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF
from the Department of Health.
Christina Paylan, M.D., pro se.
Young Hodges, Chief Appellate Counsel, Florida Department of
Health, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Paylan appeals from a final administrative order from the
Department of Health (Department) denying her application for
renewal of her medical license. The Department's order
was based on the application of section 456.0635(3)(a)(2),
Florida Statutes (2016), which mandates denial of a renewal
application from any applicant who has been convicted of or
pleaded to a felony under chapters 409, 817, or 893, Florida
Statutes,  unless the applicant is either
"currently enrolled in a drug court program that allows
the withdrawal of the plea for that felony upon successful
completion of that program" or, in the case of a
third-degree felony, where more than ten years have passed
since "the sentence and any subsequent period of
probation for such conviction or plea has ended."
undisputed that Paylan was convicted of a third-degree felony
under chapter 893, that she was neither offered nor ordered
to complete a drug court program by the trial court, and that
the ten-year period from the completion of her sentence and
subsequent probationary period had not yet expired at the
time she filed her application for renewal. Consequently, the
Department was required to apply section 456.0635(3)(a)(2) in
considering her application.
appeal, Paylan is proceeding pro se. She contends that
because she chose to take her criminal case to trial and
because the criminal charges involved only a single
prescription, she did not have the opportunity to participate
in a drug court treatment program. Thus she argues that the
application of the ten-year waiting period set forth in
section 456.0635(3)(a)(2) is unjust as applied to her. We
write only to address this argument as we find the other
issues raised by Paylan to be without merit.
August 22, 2014, Paylan was convicted after a jury trial of
obtaining a controlled substance by fraud, a third-degree
felony as set forth in section 893.13(7)(a)(9), Florida
Statutes (2011), and fraudulent use of personal information,
a third-degree felony as set forth in section 817.568(2)(a),
Florida Statutes (2011).These two convictions arose from an
incident involving a single prescription that Paylan obtained
by using the personal identification information of someone
who had consulted with her for a medical procedure. Paylan
was sentenced to 364 days in jail with jail credit applied.
29, 2015, the Department filed an amended administrative
complaint against Paylan alleging that she violated section
456.072(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2014), because she was found
guilty of crimes related to the practice of medicine.
Ultimately, in December of that year, the Board of Medicine
(Board) issued a final order requiring Paylan to pay a $5000
fine, suspending her license for two years followed by one
year of probation (with credit for time Paylan had served
under an emergency suspension order), requiring her to
complete continuing medical education, and requiring her to
her suspension, Paylan's license came up for renewal, and
she timely filed her application. On February 2, 2016, the
Department notified Paylan that it denied her application
pursuant to section 456.0635(3)(a) because she had been
convicted of a third-degree felony violation of section
893.13(7)(a)(9). The Department's Notice of Agency Action
Denial of License Renewal letter did not reference
Paylan's conviction under chapter 817.
thereafter petitioned to dismiss the Department's letter
of denial, and she requested an evidentiary hearing. In her
petition, she argued, among other things, that the denial of
her license renewal was tantamount to a license revocation on
the same ground for which the Board had already suspended her
license. Thus she argued that the denial violated principles
of double jeopardy, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.
hearing, the Department presented the testimony of a
Department employee who testified that she reviewed
Paylan's application, determined it was complete, and
then denied it based on ...