ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-06983-LDA-LS-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-09-04
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Arizona Registrar of Contractors,
COMPLAINANT
v.
Joseph Eugene Moran Jr.,
Deserts Jem Heating & Cooling LLC,
License Application No. [number redacted]
RESPONDENT
No. 2024A-06983-LDA-LS-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: August 19, 2024
APPEARANCES: Arizona Registrar of Contractors was represented by Assistant Attorney General Charles Hover III who appeared via Google Meet. Respondent Joseph Eugene Moran, Jr. appeared on his own behalf via Google Meet.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors’ Exhibits 1-10 were admitted into evidence.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
Background
1. On April 10, 2024, the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) received an application for licensure, which Application No. [number redacted].
2. The Qualifying Party was listed as Joseph Eugene Moran Jr. In the application, Mr. Moran listed that he had felony convictions in two separate matters.
3. On or about May 14, 2024, the Registrar issued its Notice of License Denial. The Registrar denied the license for the following reason:
Mr. Moran fails to qualify for a license under A.R.S. § 32-1122(C) because of felony convictions which violate A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(7).
The Registrar finds that Mr. Moran’s prior felony conviction of aggravated assault establishes that he is not qualified for licensure under A.R.S. § 32-1122(C). The Registrar further finds that licensing Mr. Moran would present an unreasonable risk to the public given the nature of his previous convictions and the current circumstances under which he proposes to contract. Mr. Moran has just recently been discharged from probation. Also, it was just years ago that he committed the felony after release from probation for a similar charge. The Registrar has determined that Applicant does not qualify for a contractor’s license.
4. On July 9, 2024 The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing on Appealable Agency Action, on August 19, 2024, before the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency.
5. At hearing, Complainant presented the testimony of Robert Stirling, Assistant General Counsel for the Registrar.
6. Mr. Stirling testified that on June 8, 2018, Mr. Moran pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, a class six undesignated class felony in Maricopa County Superior Court Cause Number CR2018-107634-001. Mr. Moran was sentenced on July 13, 2018 to probation for 2.5 years, and on July 15, 2020, Mr. Moran was discharged from probation.
7. In addition, Mr. Stirling testified that on or about that on August 14, 2020, Mr. Moran pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, a class six undesignated class felony with sexual motivation in Maricopa County Superior Court Cause Number CR2020-113440-001. Mr. Moran was sentenced on December 4, 2020 to supervised probation for 3 years, and on or about December 16 2023, Mr. Moran was discharged from probation.
8. Mr. Stirling further testified that while Mr. Moran submitted some reviews and character letters, they did not contain sufficient information to change the decision at this time to deny the license.
9. Finally, Mr. Stirling testified that the Registrar was concerned that if Mr. Moran was capable to committing these actions on a person close to him, he could be able to do the same on an unknown third-party customer.
10. Mr. Moran testified that when he committed the first felony he was younger, 21, and had anger issues. He testified that he released his anger in unhealthy manners. However, he testified that he was “back on track with God”, was now married, and found a career that he loved.
11. In addition, Mr. Moran testified that he took the required domestic violence classes as part of his sentencing and was taught to control his anger.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is by a preponderance of the evidence.
2. A preponderance of the evidence is “such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).
3. A.R.S. §32-1122(C) provides:
To obtain, renew or maintain a license under this chapter, each person who is named on a license must not have engaged in contracting without a license or committed any act that, if committed or done by any licensed contractor, would be grounds for suspension or revocation of a contractor's license or be named on a license that was suspended or revoked in this state or another state.
4. A.R.S. §32-1154(A)(7) provides:
A. The holder of a license or any person named on a license pursuant to this chapter may not commit any of the following acts or omissions:
...
7. Conviction of a felony.
5. The Registrar’s concern in this case is legitimate and well-founded. Mr. Moran was convicted of a felony, and then just two months after he completed probation, he committed a second, similar felony.
6. The Administrative Law Judge applauds Mr. Moran’s determination to get back on track. Further, the honesty he displayed in the application is admirable.
7. “[T]he Registrar is charged with the overall responsibility of protecting the welfare of the public dealing with persons engaged in the building contracting vocations and afford the public protection against incompetent, inexperienced, unlawful and fraudulent acts of building contractors.”
8. Grounds exist under A.R.S. §§ 32-1122(C) to deny Respondent a license at this time. As mentioned above, Mr. Moran appears sincere in his desire to get back on track and improve his situation, however, at this time, until Mr. Moran can demonstrate control of his anger, denial of a license is appropriate. Therefore, Mr. Moran did not establish that he should be granted a license or that the Registrar abused its discretion when it denied his application.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Registrar’s order, the Registrar affirm the decision to deny Respondent’s application for a contractor’s license.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be forty (40) days from the date of that certification.
Done this day, September 4, 2024.
/s/ Adam D. Stone
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Joseph Eugene Moran Jr.
[email redacted]
Charles Hover III
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff