<p>NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS WAKE COUNTY 10 DOJ </p><p>STEVEN DANIEL BLUE ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) PROPOSED ) PROPOSAL FOR DECISION NORTH CAROLINA PRIVATE ) PROTECTIVE SERVICE BOARD, ) ) Respondent. ) )</p><p>This contested case was heard before Administrative Law Judge Joe Webster on June 29, 2010, in Raleigh, North Carolina.</p><p>APPEARANCES</p><p>Petitioner appeared pro se</p><p>Respondent was represented by Jeffrey D. McKinney</p><p>WITNESSES</p><p>Respondent – Terry M. Wright, Deputy Director, testified for Respondent Board</p><p>Petitioner – Petitioner testified on his own behalf.</p><p>ISSUES</p><p>Whether grounds exist for Respondent to deny Petitioner’s application for private protective services permit based on its previous denial of Petitioner’s application under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 74C-1 et seq. and Petitioner’s lack of good moral character and temperate habits based on a conviction for Misdemeanor Larceny.</p><p>BURDEN OF PROOF</p><p>Respondent has the burden of proving that the Petitioner lacks good moral character or temperate habits. Petitioner may rebut Respondent’s showing. STATUTES AND RULES APPLICABLE TO THE CONTESTED CASE</p><p>Official notice is taken of the following statutes and rules applicable to this case:</p><p>N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 74C-2; 74C-5; 74C-8; 74C-12; 12 NCAC 11 § .0300</p><p>FINDINGS OF FACT</p><p>1. Respondent Board is established pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 74C-1, et seq., and is charged with the duty of licensing and registering individuals engaged in the armed and unarmed guard business.</p><p>2. Petitioner applied to Respondent Board for an armed registration permit. Petitioner’s initial application, received by the Board on July 24, 2009, was introduced as Respondent’s Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2 was admitted as part of the record.</p><p>3. Terry M. Wright, Director for Respondent Board testified that for each application, a criminal background check is conducted. Mr. Wright testified that a criminal background report was submitted by the Petitioner with his application.</p><p>4. Respondent Board then introduced as Exhibit 3 a Criminal Record Search conducted for Petitioner for Wake County. Exhibit 3 was admitted as part of the record. The Criminal Record Search revealed a conviction for Misdemeanor Larceny.</p><p>5. Mr. Wright testified that pursuant to Petitioner’s criminal background report, Petitioner’s application for registration was denied. Respondent Board introduced as Exhibit 4 a “For Cause” denial letter dated October 15, 2009. Exhibit 4 was admitted as part of the record. </p><p>6. Petitioner then testified on his own behalf. Petitioner explained that the larceny charged stemmed from a miscommunication between he and his mother regarding several items of personal property. Petitioner explained that he took several items from the home after his mother told him to move out. Petitioner’s mother wanted certain items back and pressed charges to teach Petitioner a lesson. Petitioner stated that he has reconciled with his mother.</p><p>7. Petitioner explained that he has learned from his mistakes. Petitioner explained that he has held various jobs, including other protective service positions. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW</p><p>Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 74C-12(25), Respondent Board may refuse to issue an unarmed guard registration permit for lack of good moral character or temperate habits.</p><p>Respondent Board presented evidence that Petitioner lacked good moral character or temperate habits through Petitioner’s criminal record. Petitioner rebutted the presumption that he lacks good moral character.</p><p>Based on the foregoing, the undersigned makes the following:</p><p>PROPOSAL FOR DECISION</p><p>The Private Protective Services Board will make the final decision in this contested case. It is proposed that the Board approve Petitioner’s application for a renewed armed registration permit.</p><p>ORDER</p><p>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).</p><p>NOTICE</p><p>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).</p><p>The agency that will make the final decision in this contested case is the North Carolina Private Protective Services Board.</p><p>This the 2nd day of August, 2010</p><p>______Joe Webster Administrative Law Judge</p>