Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disciplinary Guidelines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board proposes revisions to disciplinary guidelines to align with recent statute on criminal convictions and imprisonments
Summary
The board proposed amendments clarifying when it may or shall revoke licenses or registrations following imprisonment for certain felony convictions, adding factors to consider for offenses not explicitly listed and removing some prior evidentiary preferences.
The Texas State Board of Pharmacy proposed amendments to disciplinary guidelines that clarify how the board will treat criminal convictions, deferred adjudications and periods of imprisonment for licensees, registrants and pharmacy owners. Staff said the proposed changes align the board’s disciplinary guidelines with recent legislation (cited in staff remarks as Senate Bill 1080) and the occupations code. The proposed text adds a provision that the board may revoke a license or registration upon imprisonment following a felony conviction or deferred adjudication and specifies the board shall revoke a license upon imprisonment for certain listed offenses: those that directly relate to the occupation or operation of a pharmacy, offenses listed in Article 42.054 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and certain violent offenses defined by Article 62.001 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The proposal also lists circumstances — including parole or supervision revocations — that would trigger revocation. For offenses not listed in the statute, staff said the board will weigh specific factors such as the nature and seriousness of the crime, the relationship between the crime elements and the duties of the licensee, the amount of time since the offense, rehabilitation and compliance with supervision conditions, and letters of recommendation. The proposed revisions remove language that previously emphasized seeking letters from prosecutors and certain law-enforcement officials. A board member asked staff to clarify the reference to evaluating correlations between elements of a crime and professional duties; staff said the board is to consider whether the elements of the offense relate to the duties of pharmacists or pharmacy operations (for example, theft involving access to controlled substances). The board voted to propose the amendments. A motion to propose was moved by Randy Martin and seconded by Donnie Lewis and recorded as carried.
