Miller v. Ohio Dep't of Educ.
2017 Ohio 7197
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Robert L. Miller Jr. applied in 2013 for a three-year Ohio pupil activity permit to volunteer assisting his wife’s high‑school basketball team; he answered “no” on the application regarding any prior felony or non‑traffic misdemeanor convictions.
- ODE’s background check revealed military court‑martial convictions (1998–1999) for multiple larceny/theft‑type specifications and related offenses involving substantial public funds; ODE initiated proceedings to deny the permit.
- Miller requested and received an administrative hearing; the hearing officer recommended issuing a three‑year permit conditioned on evidence of rehabilitation.
- The State Board of Education rejected the hearing officer’s recommendation, found aggravating factors (large sums, public funds, deceit, involvement of subordinates, non‑disclosure on application, lengthy sentence), and permanently denied Miller’s application and eligibility to apply for any ODE license.
- The common pleas court affirmed the Board, finding the Board’s decision supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence; this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to adopt the hearing officer’s recommendation | Miller: Board improperly overruled hearing officer without adequate reason; factual misstatements and record doesn’t support denial | ODE/Board: Board weighed aggravating/mitigating factors, relied on certified convictions and other record evidence, and articulated reasons for disagreement | No abuse of discretion; Board’s decision was supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence |
| Whether Miller’s military convictions are substantially comparable to Ohio felony thefts and thus disqualifying | Miller: challenges characterization and says record lacks objective proof he stole public funds | ODE: military larceny/related convictions align with Ohio theft statutes and meet grounds for license refusal under R.C. 3319.31 | Convictions were substantially comparable to Ohio theft felonies; proper basis for action under R.C. 3319.31 |
| Whether Miller demonstrated rehabilitation under Ohio Adm. Code 3301‑20‑01(E) | Miller: pointed to elapsed time, community service, steady employment, and positive youth work | ODE: aggravating factors outweigh mitigation; applicant bears burden to prove rehabilitation and doubt resolved to protect school community | Board reasonably found mitigation insufficient and could deny licensure; applicant must prove rehabilitation and failed to do so here |
| Whether Miller was denied due process because he did not attend the Board meeting where an alternative resolution was adopted | Miller: website indicated approval; he lacked notice the Board would substitute a denial resolution and could not address Board | ODE: Miller had statutory notice and the right to a hearing; Board meetings do not permit parties to argue pending administrative appeals | No due process violation; Miller received statutorily required notice and hearing; administrative rules do not require party input at Board meetings |
Key Cases Cited
- Bartchy v. State Bd. of Edn., 120 Ohio St.3d 205 (2008) (defines standard for administrative‑record review: agency orders must be supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence)
- Our Place, Inc. v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 63 Ohio St.3d 570 (1992) (defines reliable/probative/substantial evidence concepts)
- Rossford Exempted Village Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. State Bd. of Edn., 63 Ohio St.3d 705 (1992) (appellate role limited to reviewing whether trial court abused discretion in affirming agency)
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp., 50 Ohio St.3d 157 (1990) (defines abuse of discretion as unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable)
- State ex rel. Bd. of Ed. of Bratenahl Local School Dist. v. State Bd. of Ed., 53 Ohio St.2d 173 (1978) (State Bd. adjudications are governed by R.C. Chapter 119)
- Ohio Historical Soc. v. State Emp. Relations Bd., 66 Ohio St.3d 466 (1993) (agency findings are presumed correct and entitled to deference unless shown internally inconsistent or otherwise unsupportable)