ALJDEC - Licensing

23A-2020070492-NUR · State Board of Nursing · 2023-02-17

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN THE MATTER OF THE REGISTERED NURSE LICENSE NO. RN165450 ISSUED TO:

TRACI DANIELLE BAKER

AKA: Traci Pepper Mathis,

RESPONDENT.

No. 23A-[number redacted]-NUR

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: January 13, 2023.

APPEARANCES: Respondent Traci Danielle Baker AKA Traci Pepper Mathis did not appear. The Arizona State Board of Nursing was represented by Assistant Attorney General Charles Hover III.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Kay Abramsohn

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Arizona State Board of Nursing (“Board”) has the authority to regulate and control the practice of nursing in the State of Arizona, pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) §§ 32-1606, 32-1663, 32-1664, 41-1092.11(B). The Board also has the authority to impose disciplinary sanctions against the holders of nursing licenses for violations of the Nurse Practice Act, A.R.S. §§ 32-1601through 1667 and Arizona Administrative Code (“A.A.C.”) Rules 4-19-101 to -815.

Respondent holds Board-issued Registered Nurse License No. RN165450.

Respondent’s renewal application, received by the Board, disclosed a 2016 DUI as well as a 2018 DUI, neither of which had previously been disclosed or timely reported to the Board.

The Board’s investigator, Anna Anderson, subpoenaed court records from City of Surprise, Arizona and from Washington State as well as various employment records. Following review of the matter, including an interview with Respondent, Ms. Anderson prepared an investigative report.

Based on its consideration of the report, the Board issued a June 6, 2022, Interim Order for Respondent to obtain a comprehensive psychological evaluation including a substance use evaluation from a Board-approved licensed psychologist within 45 days; further, in the event such was not completed, the Board would consider issuing charges against Respondent.

Respondent participated in an evaluation with Dr. Roxanne Hait, Psy.D. who prepared an Evaluation Report. Dr. Hait’s report was subsequently considered by the Board at its November 2022 meeting.

As a result of the Board’s consideration of this matter, the Board determined to summarily suspend Respondent’s Arizona license pending an administrative hearing. The Board’s action was based on information about the two DUI circumstances, the investigative report and Dr. Hait’s report:

In November of 2016, Respondent was pulled over for making an improper turn, where the officer observed Respondent’s watery eyes, slurred speech, and her fumbling with her insurance card. When Respondent performed a standard field sobriety test, she showed signs of impairment. A warrant was obtained due to her uncooperativeness with police; police were able to draw her blood and received a blood alcohol content of .111 percent. This led to a complaint being filed in March of 2017 officially charging Respondent with driving under the influence, at .08 or more. In September of 2020, Respondent was convicted, pursuant to a guilty plea, of driving under the influence in Surprise City Court.

On June 22, 2018, Respondent was observed by multiple witnesses swerving in and out of lanes, traveling at a high rate of speed. Respondent hit a concrete median, her tire blew out, and she went off to the side of the road. Respondent was being followed by a friend who was on a motorcycle; the motorcyclist also hit the concrete median. The motorcyclist was pronounced deceased on scene. Respondent was observed to have slurred speech, rapid speech, flushed face, and the odor of· an intoxicant emitted from her breath. Respondent’s eyes were bloodshot, she was stumbling, and she could not stand still. ·Respondent maintained to the police that she has diabetes and, although it is checked on multiple occasions, her blood sugar levels were not indicative of causing the type of behaviors Respondent was exhibiting. Subsequently, she was charged and, on June 26, 2018, Respondent entered a plea of not guilty. On August 22, 2018, Respondent was convicted, pursuant to a guilty plea, of driving under the influence.

During the investigation process, Ms. Anderson found Respondent to be “short” with her, seemingly not understanding the email communications and, thus, uncooperative, defensive, and aggressive. Ms. Anderson had stopped the interview with Respondent for those reasons.

In her report, Dr. Hait indicated that she could not opine on Respondent’s safety to practice due to Respondent’s uncooperativeness. Dr. Hait recommended that Respondent should submit to a second evaluation with another evaluator and should be cooperative with the evaluation.

Following the issuance of the Summary Suspension, Ms. Anderson received an email from Respondent telling her/the Board to cease and desist from all communication with Respondent.

On December 28, 2022, the Board issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing, Summary Suspension Expedited Hearing, which set forth Respondent’s alleged violations of A.R.S. § 32-1601(27)(d), (e), (g), and (j) and A.A.C. R4-19-403(17) and (28).

At the date and time set for hearing, Respondent did not appear telephonically or by video conference; she had not requested that the hearing be continued prior to the hearing convening. Although the start of the hearing was delayed nearly 15 minutes to allow Respondent an opportunity to appear, 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.

At the administrative hearing, the Board presented testimony of Investigator Anna Anderson and Dr. Roxanne Hait, and presented Exhibits 1 through 10, all of which were admitted to the hearing record.

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 practical nurse 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 Vazzano 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 pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1601(27)(d), (e), (g), and (j) and A.A.C. R4-19-403(17) and (28), as was alleged in the Complaint and Notice of Hearing, which is incorporated by reference herein. As such, the Board established cause to impose 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 Registered Nurse License RN165450 of Respondent Traci Danielle Baker aka Traci Pepper Mathis.

The Administrative Law Judge further recommended that the Board revoke Registered Nurse License RN165450 of Respondent Traci Danielle Baker aka Traci Pepper Mathis.

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge's written decision by so advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge's written decision, that Administrative Law Judge Decision shall be certified as the final decision in this matter 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 five days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000RECOMMENDED this day, February 17, 2023.

/s/ Kay Abramsohn

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically February 17, 2023 to:

Joey Ridenour, RN, MN

Executive Director

State Board of Nursing

ATTN: Trina Smith; Janeen Dahn

1740 W Adams, Suite 2000

Phoenix, Arizona 85007

Charles Hover, III

Assistant Attorney General

Arizona Attorney General's Office-CIV/LES

2005 N Central Ave

Phoenix, AZ 85004-1592

[email redacted]

Traci Danielle Baker

12435 Lola Drive

Spring Hill, FL 34608-1335

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff