Court Opinion

ID: 9903665
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-27 15:58:40.380844+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:29.179244
License: Public Domain

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                      FIFTH DISTRICT

                                  NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
                                  FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
                                  DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

WILLIAM SPAUDE,

           Appellant,

v.                                       Case No. 5D22-322
                                         LT Case Nos. 19-174
                                                      21-2145EC
                                                      22-001

COMMISSION ON ETHICS,

          Appellee.
________________________________/

Opinion filed December 30, 2022

Administrative Appeal    from   the
Commission on Ethics.

E. Dylan Rivers, and Kevin A. Forsthoefel,
Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Melody A. Hadley, Advocate for the Florida
Commission on Ethics, Tallahassee, and
Steven J. Zuilkowski, and Grayden P.
Schafer, and Suhail Chhabra, General
Counsel, Florida Commission on Ethics,
Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.
      William Spaude, Mayor of the City of Bushnell, appeals the Final Order

of the Florida Commission on Ethics which determined that he violated

section 112.313(6), Florida Statutes (2022). Spaude argues that the

Commission failed to establish by clear and convincing proof that he acted

corruptly as defined by sections 112.313 and 112.312(9). We agree that

neither the facts nor the law support a finding that Spaude acted corruptly as

that term is defined.

      Accordingly, we reverse and quash the Commission’s final order.

Based on this ruling, we do not reach Spaude’s remaining argument

regarding the lack of proportionality of the penalty imposed to the violations

found.

      REVERSED. ORDER QUASHED.

EDWARDS and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
EISNAUGLE, J., dissents, with opinion.

                                      2
                                                         Case No. 5D22-322
                                                         LT Case Nos. 19-174
EISNAUGLE, J., dissenting.                                            21-2145EC
                                                                      22-001

      I respectfully dissent because I conclude that the evidence was

sufficient to support a finding that Mayor Spaude acted “corruptly.” Here,

while the benefit obtained was arguably small, a reasonable finder of fact

could conclude that Spaude acted “with a wrongful intent and for the purpose

of obtaining . . . a[] benefit resulting from [the] act . . . which is inconsistent

with the proper performance of [Spaude’s] public duties.” § 112.312(9), Fla.

Stat. (2022).

                                        3