Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario
Panel: Michael Hogard, RPN Chairperson Agnese Bianchi, RN Member Kim Jinkerson, RPN Member Gino Cucchi Public Member Joan King Public Member
Between:
College of Nurses of Ontario Jean-Claude Killey for College of Nurses of Ontario
- and -
Sherry Lee Reaume Registration No. IE10926 No Representation for Sherry Lee Reaume
Heard: March 5, 2012
Decision and Reasons
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee on March 5, 2012 at the College of Nurses of Ontario (“the College”) at Toronto.
As Sherry Lee Reaume (the “Member”) was not present, the hearing recessed for twenty minutes to allow time for the Member to appear. Upon reconvening, the panel noted that the Member was not in attendance nor was she represented.
Counsel for the College provided the panel with an affidavit that the Notice of Hearing had been mailed to two different addresses: the Member’s address on file at the College and the address appearing on the probation order. The panel was satisfied that the College had met its obligation to notify the Member of the pending hearing and therefore proceeded with the hearing in the Member’s absence.
The Allegations
The allegations against the Member as stated in the Notice of Hearing dated January 11, 2012, are as follows.
- You have committed an act of professional misconduct as provided by subsection 51(1)(a) of the Health Professions Procedural Code of the Nursing Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 32, as amended, in that you were found guilty of an offence that is relevant to your suitability to practise, as follows:
a) on or about July 27, 2010, you were found guilty of the criminal offence of theft, contrary to s. 334 (b) of the Criminal Code of Canada; and/or
b) on or about July 27, 2010, you were found guilty of the criminal offence of fraud, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada.
Member’s Plea
Given that the Member was not present nor represented, she was deemed to have denied the allegations in the Notice of Hearing. The Hearing proceeded on the basis that the College bore the onus of proving the allegations in the Notice of Hearing against the Member.
Overview
In 2009, the Member was the Resident Relations Coordinator of a long term care facility, [ ]. On December 17, 2009, the Member took an inactivated [ ] credit card from a client. The Member activated the [card] and withdrew a total of $1,005.00.
On March 3, 2010, the Member was arrested and on July 27, 2010, the Member pled guilty to theft of a credit card and fraud. On September 21, 2010, [a judge] of the Ontario Court of Justice ordered a suspended sentence with a 24-month probation and 72 hours of community service. The Member was also ordered to make restitution to the Court in the amount of $1,005.00.
[The Member]’s certificate of registration was suspended on March 11, 2010, for non payment of fees. The Member has not been in contact with the College and did not attend the hearing.
The issue before the panel was whether the Member’s criminal offence is relevant to her suitability to practise nursing. After hearing the College’s evidence, the panel found the Member had committed professional misconduct in that she was found guilty of the offences of theft and fraud, which are relevant to the suitability to practise.
The Evidence
College counsel submitted eight documents into evidence:
Status of Member’s Registration
Certificate of Conviction
Court Transcript “Guilty Plea Proceedings”
Court Transcript “Excerpt Guilty Plea Proceedings”
Court Transcript “Excerpt Guilty Plea”
Court Transcript “Reasons for Sentence”
Restitution Order
Probation Order
The court documents provide evidence that the Member pled guilty to theft and fraud under $5,000.00. The Court found the Member was guilty of theft and fraud from [the Client] in the amount of $1,005.00.
The Member’s “Status of Registration” provides evidence that the Member’s certificate of registration has been suspended for non-payment of fees since March 11, 2010.
Final Submissions
College counsel submitted that the evidence before the panel clearly demonstrates that the Member was guilty of theft and fraud as set out in the Notice of Hearing. College counsel submitted that these offences are relevant to the Member’s suitability to practise. He submitted that the Member’s actions affect broader public trust as well as a nurse’s duty to the client.
Decision and Reasons for Decision
The College bears the onus of proving the allegations in accordance with the standard of proof, that being the balance of probabilities, and based upon clear, cogent and convincing evidence.
Having considered the evidence and the onus and standard of proof, the panel finds that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged in paragraph 1 (a) and (b) of the Notice of Hearing. In particular, the Member was found guilty, in criminal court, of theft and fraud under $5,000.00 of [the Client], and these offences are relevant to her suitability to practise.
The Member’s misappropri