WILLIAM SPAUDE vs COMMISSION ON ETHICS
This text of WILLIAM SPAUDE vs COMMISSION ON ETHICS (WILLIAM SPAUDE vs COMMISSION ON ETHICS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
WILLIAM SPAUDE vs COMMISSION ON ETHICS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-spaude-vs-commission-on-ethics-fladistctapp-2022.