Return to Browsing

10 N.J.A.R. 69

Maldonado, Wilson: Gaming Enforcement State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of v
Formats: PDF | DjVu— Help viewing DjVu Files
Citation: 10 N.J.A.R. 69
Decision Date: 1987
Synopsis: The Division of Gaming Enforcement filed a complaint with the Casino Control Commission seeking revocation of respondent's gam- ing license. Respondent requested a hearing and the matter was trans- mitted to the Office of Administrative Law. The essential facts presented by the Division at the hearing were not disputed by respondent. Respondent was arrested for selling co- caine to an undercover agent on two occasions and was subsequently convicted, as a result of plea bargaining, of simple possession of drugs. However, there was evidence, in the form of computer tapes main- tained on respondent's home computer, that respondent had been selling drugs for at least a year and had a substantial income from selling drugs in the prior year. Marijuana, cocaine and drug para- phernalia were also found in respondent's home. The administrative law judge found that respondent had committed acts equivalent to a crime listed in N.d.S.A. 5:12-86(c) (i.e., the sale of cocaine) and that respondent's license should be revoked pursuant to N.J.S.A. 5:12-86(g) unless he could show rehabilitation pursuant to N.J.S.A. 5:12-90(h) and proof of good character, honesty and integrity required by N.d.S.A. 5:12-90(b). As evidence of rehabilitation, respondent cited three factors. First, he had satisfactorily completed a 30-day, in-patient therapeutic pro- gram for chemical dependency. Second, he was attempting to attend 90 meetings of Narcotics Anonymous in 90 days. Third, he had cooperated with the New Jersey State Police by purchasing a con- trolled dangerous substance and identifying the source to the State Police. Respondent claimed that he was offered the return of his Division of Gaming r. Maldonado casino employee license in exchange for continued cooperation with the State Police. The administrative law judge found that respondent failed to af- firmatively show his rehabilitation pursuant to N.J.S.A. 5:12-90(h). In addition, the judge found that acting as a criminal informant is not evidence of rehabilitation and, at any rate, no alleged agreement to obtain a casino license could be enforced. With respect to respon- dent's claim that he was offered the return of his license if he cooper- ated with police, the judge ruled that such a bargain, if made, is unenforceable. The administrative law judge also found that being a police inform- ant was not evidence of good character, honesty and integrity. Accordingly, the administrative law judge ordered that respondent's casino employee license be revoked. Upon review, this initial decision was adopted by the Casino Con- trol Commission. William E. Mountford, Jr., Deputy Attorney General for petitioner (W. Cary Edwards, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney) John J. Zaryck, Esq., for respondent
Rule(s) Cited: 19:41-8.8 
Statute(s) Cited: 5:12-86c 5:12-86g 5:12-89b 5:12-90b 5:12-90h 24:21-19