Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

LAMAR T. ZIMMERMAN v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (12/03/80)

decided: December 3, 1980.

LAMAR T. ZIMMERMAN, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND LICENSURE, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the State Board of Medical Education and Licensure in case of State Board of Medical Education and Licensure v. Lamar T. Zimmerman, M.D., No. 4069-E.

COUNSEL

Percy DeMarco, with him A. Charles Peruto, Peruto, Ryan & Vitullo, for petitioner.

Kenneth E. Brody, Assistant Attorney General, with him Edward Biester, Attorney General, for respondent.

Judges Blatt, Craig and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 75]

Petitioner Lamar T. Zimmerman appeals from a decision of the State Board of Medical Education and Licensure (board), which revoked petitioner's medical license under Section 15(a)(3) and (a)(8), of the Medical Practice Act of 1974,*fn1 because he was convicted of a felony and found guilty of immoral and unprofessional conduct.

The facts are not in dispute. On July 20, 1978, a jury trial in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, resulted in a verdict finding petitioner, a physician licensed to practice in Pennsylvania, guilty of violating, among other matters, Section 13(a)(30), of The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act,*fn2 a felony under Section 13(f)(1). Petitioner has appealed that criminal conviction to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

On September 6, 1978 the Department of State, Commission of Professional and Occupational Affairs, initiated license proceedings against petitioner

[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 76]

    before the board. On August 14, 1979 a hearing examiner issued an order revoking petitioner's license. Thereafter petitioner appealed to the board, which affirmed the hearing examiner's decision.

Petitioner's first contention is that the record in the criminal case is devoid of competent evidence to support the guilty verdict. The Superior Court, not this court, is the proper forum to review the evidence adduced at the criminal trial. Therefore, we cannot reinstate petitioner's license on the basis of that contention.

Petitioner next contends (1) that his license cannot be revoked until his conviction is final and (2) that a conviction is not final until the disposition of all appeals taken by the petitioner. We cannot ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.