Casino Employee License

Back to Topic Index

Altering Dice
Altering the shape of dice to minimize whatever advantage a casino patron might have is a violation of N.J.A.C. 19:46-1.15 even if there is no personal profit involved. Decision: 5 N.J.A.R. 493
Association with Career Offender
Although a petitioner's relationship with her father and her romantic relationship with a former housemate did indeed constitute association with career offenders, these associations were of such a nature as to pose no appreciable threat to the proper functioning of legalized gambling. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 092
Character and Integrity
A petitioner's failure to disclose any information concerning his arrests for assault and battery and a disorderly persons offense reflect adversely upon the petitioner's good character, honesty and integrity and his suitability for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 176
Petitioner's failure to disclose his criminal convic- tion, his disorderly persons offenses or the real reason why his previous employment has been terminated reflected adversely upon the petitioner's good character, honesty and integrity and his suitability for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 231
Disqualifying Offenses
Persons convicted of disqualifying offenses are not suitable for employment in the casino industry. Revocation of license or registration is the appropriate sanction when an employee has committed a disqualifying offense. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 090
Enumerated Disqualifier
A conviction for bookmaking is a specifically enumerated disqualifier for licensure as a casino employee under the Casino Control Act. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 176
Petitioner's failure to demonstrate rehabilitation sufficient to overcome a specifically enumerated automatic disqualifier for licensure under the Casino Control Act supports a denial of his application for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 176
Petitioner's failure to demonstrate rehabilitation sufficient to overcome a specifically enumerated automatic disqualifier under the Casino Control Act supports a denial of his application for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 231
Larceny convictions are specifically enumerated disqualifiers for licensure as a casino employee under the Casino Control Act. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 231
Failure to Disclose
An inadvertent failure to disclose which does not demonstrate a conscious disregard for the regulatory system will not bar licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 092
An applicant's failure to disclose any information concerning his arrests for assault and battery and a disorderly persons offense reflect adversely upon the applicant's good character, honesty and integrity and his suitability for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 176
Petitioner's failure to disclose his criminal conviction, his disorderly persons offense or the real reason why his previous employment had been terminated reflected adversely upon the applicant's good character, honesty and integrity and his suitability for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 231
Failure of petitioner to disclose information relating to her past employment, her subsequent termination for selling marked down merchandise to fellow employees and her resulting arrest for petty larceny and conviction for shoplifting is a failure to disclose facts material to her license qualification; thus she is disqualified for licensure as a casino employee. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 341
Mere inadvertent failure to disclose facts on a personal history disclosure form does not warrant automatic disqualification. Decision: 7 N.J.A.R. 101
Where a casino applicant fails to disclose a prior conviction, such failure to disclose will be found to be intentional where the applicant had only one conviction and such a significant event could not be easily forgotten. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 579
While an applicant's knowledge of written English may be limited, he will still have been found to have failed to disclose a prior conviction when he fully understands spoken English and an agency of the Division orally reviewed all appropriate questions. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 579
Financial Stability
The standard for financial stability must be applied consistently to both key employee and employee license applicants. The prime emphasis should be on current financial stability rather than previous financial problems. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 190
Informant
In reviewing the need for confidentiality of an informant, the Commission may consider: 1) whether the informant was acting upon a duty to report violations of the Casino Control Act; 2) the Division of Gaming Enforcement's unique status as both a regulatory and law enforcement agency; 3) the Division's legitimate concerns for the confidentiality of its sources generally; 4) a resp0ndent's admission of the conduct allegedly constituting a violation; and 5) the absence of any indication that the informant had played a significant part in the alleged violation. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 274
In determining whether to disclose the identity of an informant in a Casino Control case, the Commission has chosen to determine whether the Division of Gaming Enforcement's concern for confidentiality is outweighed by a respondent's need for discovery. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 274
Inimicality
A pending criminal indictment is sufficient in and of itself to establish inimicality under the Casino Control Act. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 126
Rehabilitation factors should be considered before concluding that an offense is or is not inimical to licensure under the Casino Control Act. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 301
Interim Relief
Administrative law judges are not authorized to grant interim relief where the agency head has issued an interlocutory order and the application for interim relief seeks a review of the propriety of the agency head's order. Decision: 3 N.J.A.R. 230
Pending Criminal Charges
Suspension of a casino license pending criminal proceedings protects the regulatory system and the integrity of gaming while criminal charges are resolved. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 081
Plea Bargain
Although respondent was convicted for possession of drugs as a result of plea bargaining, evidence showed that respondent engaged in sale of cocaine, a statutory disqualifier. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 069
Reapplication
Individual denied a casino key employee license cannot apply for approval as a vendor until five years after the application for an employee license was denied, pursuant to N.J.A.C. 19:41-8.8, the reapplication regulation. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 215
Rehabilitation
An applicant's failure to provide a complete record of his arrests and convictions coupled with his conflicting testimony offered at the hearing leads to a conclusion that the applicant has failed to demonstrate rehabilitation sufficient to overcome a specifically enumerated disqualifier under the Casino Control Act. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 176
A failure to affirmatively establish rehabilitation where an applicant's criminal conviction automatically disqualifies him for licensure under the Casino Control Act supports a denial of a casino employee license. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 231
The Casino Control Act does not provide casino key employee license applicants with the opportunity to demonstrate rehabilitation from a per se disqualifying offense which took place within 10 years of the application. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 301
The intention to attend 90 meetings of Narcotics Anonymous in 90 days ("90 and 90"), without having actually accomplished that goal, does not demonstrate rehabilitation. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 069
Acting as an informant for the police regarding the source of controlled dangerous substances is not evidence of rehabilitation sufficient to overcome revocation of a casino employee license and is not evidence of good character. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 069
When respondent minimizes the crime leading to statutory disqualification and shows no lessening of the greed that motivated the crime, rehabilitation is not demonstrated. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 069
Casino hotel employee who was convicted of a disqualifying offense did not establish rehabilitation. Evidence of rehabilitation was outweighed by the seriousness of the crime, the absence of mitigating factors and the short period of time which had elapsed since the offense. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 426
Sanctions
Determination of an appropriate sanction should be based upon the risk of the public and to the integrity of gaming operations created by the conduct of the licensee; the seriousness of the conduct of the licensee and whether the conduct was purposeful; any justification or excuse for such conduct by the licensee and the prior history of the licensee involved. Decision: 5 N.J.A.R. 439
Revocation is the only appropriate sanction when a disqualifying offense has occurred. Revocation can be avoided only if rehabilitation is established or a waiver is granted. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 090
Statutory Disqualifler
While not a statutory disqualifier, conviction of a fourth degree crime of theft renders the licensure of an applicant inimical to the policies of the Casino Control Act. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 301
Theft
Court reversed the denial of relicensure for a cleaning person who took unattended tokens from the slot machine area of a casino. The Casino Control Commission had concluded that the act constituted theft, an offense that is inimical to the purposes of the Casino Control Act. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 935
Unprosecuted Conduct
Evidence of unprosecuted criminal conduct that would be a statutory disqualifier warrants revocation. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 075
Division failed to meet burden of proof regarding its theory that casino hotel employee intended to sell counterfeit drugs. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 075
Waiver of Disqualification
Although evidence of unprosecuted conduct constituted statutorily disqualifying crimes, commission waived disqualification pursuant to N.J.S.A. 5:12-91(e). Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 075
Not enough time had elapsed since respondent's conviction for him to demonstrate rehabilitation, but disqualification was waived in the interests of justice because of respondent's ongoing and diligent efforts toward rehabilitation. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 191