Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nursing License Revocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board revokes LPN Amanda Espinosa's license after allegations deemed admitted
Summary
Connecticut Department of Public Health hearing found allegations against Amanda Espinosa, LPN, admitted; the board voted to find the charges proved and revoke her license after fact-finding and discussion.
The Connecticut Department of Public Health hearing board voted on April 2, 2025, to revoke the registered practical nurse license of Amanda Espinosa (petition number 2024-35) after the board deemed the allegations in the statement of charges admitted and found the charges proved.
The board said the Department of Public Health had provided notice and evidence, and the allegations in the statement of charges were treated as admitted. “Allegations have been admitted,” Chair Gina Reiner said as the board moved into fact-finding. The board then voted to find on all charges and, after discussion of possible disciplinary options under statute, voted to revoke the license.
Board members emphasized the respondent’s prior consent orders and repeated substance-use issues documented in the DPH file. Attorney Newton, representing the department, asked the board to deem the allegations admitted and to consider the department’s request for revocation. Brett Moody of DPH testified under oath that DPH had sent hearing notices by certified mail and email and that the respondent had confirmed she would attend the April 2 hearing by email on Jan. 31, 2025. Moody said the certified-mail tracking showed delivery to the respondent’s last-known address.
Cindy Arpin moved to “uphold the department’s request to deem allegations admitted” for the statement of charges; Mary seconded. The motion passed on a roll call in which all voting members present recorded “aye.” The board then moved to fact-finding and, on a motion by Arpin and seconded by Mary, voted to find on all charges. After discussion of statutory disciplinary options (including revocation, suspension, censure, and probation per statute 19a-17), Arpin moved for revocation; Mary seconded. On roll call, the board again voted unanimously to impose revocation as the remedy.
Chair Gina Reiner read the board exhibits and DPH exhibits into the record. Board exhibits 1–7 included the notice of hearing, statement of charges (dated Jan. 7, 2025), summary suspension order (Jan. 15, 2025), notices of continued hearing, and certified-mail tracking showing delivery attempts. DPH exhibits 1–8 included monitoring reports, affidavits, prior consent orders (petitions 2013-679 and 2017-206), a modified consent order, and a memorandum of decision (petition 2021-1222); several DPH exhibits were entered under seal as indicated in the record.
Board members cited repeated positive screens for alcohol and cannabinoids, missed urine screens, prior consent orders, and the respondent’s absence from the hearing as factors supporting revocation. Lisa (board member) said the respondent’s history of substance-use disorder and prior consent orders supported the remedy, and other members echoed concern for public safety.
The board recorded the votes by name; each voting member indicated “aye” during the roll calls conducted for both the motions to find and for the remedy. The board announced that the respondent’s license had been revoked and moved on to the next scheduled hearing.
The board’s actions were conducted under Connecticut General Statutes cited during the hearing (19a-10, 19a-14 and 19a-17). The record shows the board admitted the department’s exhibits and entered DPH exhibits 1–8 as full exhibits for fact-finding and remedy.
No further remedial conditions, appeal deadlines, or effective-dates beyond the board announcement of revocation were stated on the transcript segment provided.
