ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

20A-1708063-NUR · State Board of Nursing · 2020-03-19

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN THE MATTER OF REGISTERED NURSE LICENSE NO. RN176913

ISSUED TO:

LAURA DIANE LEOPARD,

AKA: Osborne, Laura Diane; Goodloe, Laura Diane; Tomochak,

Laura Diane; Keys, Laura Diane

RESPONDENT

No. 20A-1708063-NUR

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: February 28, 2020, with the record held open until March 13, 2020.

APPEARANCES: Respondent Laura Diane Leopard did not appear. The Arizona State Board of Nursing was represented by Assistant Attorney General Sunita Krishna.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Board has the authority to regulate and control the practice of nursing in the State of Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-1606, 1663, and 1664. The Board also has the authority to determine whether licensees have committed unprofessional conduct, thereby furnishing cause for discipline under the Nurse Practice Act, A.R.S. §§ 32-1601 through 1667.

Respondent holds Board-issued registered nurse (RN) license number RN176913.

On March 29, 2018, the Board received a complaint from the Chief Nursing Officer of Florence Hospital in Anthem, AZ, that Respondent was recently terminated for narcotic charting discrepancies. Based on this complaint the Board opened an investigation.

On December 1, 2018, during the investigation, Respondent submitted a hair test that returned positive result for opiates, morphine, and methamphetamine without a prescription.

On March 27, 2019, Respondent admitted to Board staff during an in-person interview that she used heroin for several weeks from June 2018 through August 2018 and that she had a substance abuse problem.

On June 17, 2019, while the investigation was pending, the Board received a second complaint from the Arizona Papago Military Reservation indicating that on April 6, 2019, Respondent tested positive for methamphetamines during a random military drug test while serving as a member of the Arizona Army National Guard.

On or about April 1, 2019, Respondent voluntarily signed the Alternative to Discipline Program Confidential Evaluation Agreement (ATD), requiring that within 3 days of the effective date of the agreement, Respondent was to make an appointment and complete a psychological evaluation, that was to be completed within 30 days.

On or about July 18, 2019, Respondent submitted to a psychological evaluation with a Board-approved evaluator who diagnosed Respondent with both mental health and substance use issues and made treatment recommendations.

In the evaluator’s report, Respondent’s account of her illegal drug use was recorded as follows:

[Respondent] indicated she was given morphine initially for her hand injury in 2018 and “the nurse made me feel like I was a drug-seeker, so I refused the pain meds.” [Respondent] described crying from the pain and being discharged with no pain medication, “I was stubborn, I went home and it was way worse.” At the time her children were being cared for by her parents so she went to her neighbor’s house. She reported he offered her a beer, “I was so miserable I had three beers and I’m not a drinker, I was definitely intoxicated, and the guy offered me pain meds. He gave her heroin, I think I knew that’s what it was. I spent three days in that house, I was in and out of it, I couldn’t tell you what was going on.” [Respondent] indicated she went home after three days, but was still experiencing physical pain, so she returned two days later, “it was a similar incident but not as long and I went home and I was still hurting.” [Respondent] indicated she wanted help with her pain but “I had never bough drugs before, so I Googled how to use it and I learned a lot about buying it on Craig’s List, and I bought it, and I was completely along. I never told anyone, I was doing it for six days. Then I felt like shit when I stopped.” [Respondent] indicated she went several months without using then after her car accident in August, “my back started hurting so I went back on Craig’s List, my mom was with my kids... and this time didn’t stop. I met someone who wanted to try it, so for 10 weeks we did it, at the end I was doing it three times a day.” [Respondent] indicated she eventually told her mother and sister about her use and her desire to get clean, “they got us a hotel in Flagstaff and gave us three weeks, that was the most terrible thing physically, the pain, we fought but after day seven it was not as bad. Then I came home and I thought I was better, but my mom gave me a chaperone.” [Respondent] indicated she last used heroin in September 2018.

Prior to May 2018, [Respondent] indicated she had only previously used alcohol and marijuana. While at the hotel in Flagstaff, [Respondent] indicated she “Googled everything, I found out cocaine helps with withdrawal, so I did it a few times, I’m unsure if I felt something, I’m unsure if it helped even, it was not a good experience.” [Respondent] denied use of cocaine since that time.

After going through withdrawal from heroin, [Respondent] indicated her depression worsened and she was having trouble getting out of bed. At that time the mother of the man she was using with “gave me a candy with meth in it, I felt better until she didn’t come and then I felt horrible. I don’t regret it, I did it to get out of bed and be a mom, it was wrong but for the right reasons. The heroin was dumb.” [Respondent] indicated she used methamphetamine off and on for about two and a half weeks and last used two and a half months ago, “I found out for sure it was meth and I didn’t go back to her house. He’s not in my life now. He didn’t see anything wrong with it.”

All errors in original.

The evaluator opined Respondent could safely practice with treatment recommendations and with a restriction of no handling of controlled substances.

On or about January 13, 2020, the Board summarily suspended Respondent’s registered nurse license and requested that proceedings be promptly instituted and determined.

On or about February 7, 2020, the Board issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing, Summary Suspension Expedited Hearing, that alleged violations of A.R.S. § 32-1601(26)(d), (e), and (j) and A.A.C. R4-19-403(17).

The Notice of Hearing was sent via certified mail to Respondent at her address of record.

Respondent did not request to appear telephonically at the duly noticed hearing and did not request that the hearing be continued prior to the hearing convening. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 20 minutes to allow Respondent additional travel time, she did not appear, personally or through an attorney, and did not contact the OAH to request that the start of the hearing be further delayed prior to the hearing convening. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend her Registered Nurse License.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Notice of Hearing that the Board mailed to Respondent at her address of record was reasonable, and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.04; A.R.S. § 41-1061(A).

This matter lies within the Board’s jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 32-1606(B)(10).

The Board bears the burden of proof and must establish cause to penalize Respondent’s registered nurse’s license by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and (B)(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952).

“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). A preponderance of the evidence is “evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is, evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1120 (8th ed. 2004).

The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct as alleged in the Complaint and Notice of Hearing. As such, the Board established cause to impose a disciplinary sanction against Respondent’s license under A.R.S. § 32-1663(D) and A.R.S. § 32-1664(N).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, the Administrative Law Judge recommends that the Board affirm its order summarily suspending Respondent Laura Diane Leopard’s Registered Nurse License number RN176913.

It is further recommended that the Board revoke Respondent Laura Diane Leopard’s Registered Nurse License number RN176913.

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 five days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, March 19, 2020.

/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Joey Ridenour, RN, MN, Executive Director

State Board of Nursing-54864001

001

-137160-45720000