In the Matter of the Suspension or Revocation of the License of Jitan
Docket No. A-3517-20
Decided October 13, 2022
Submitted by Medical License Defense Attorney, Jeffrey Hark.
In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of the final agency decision of the Board of Medical Examiners suspending his medical license for eight years after he plead guilty to a crime of moral turpitude.
Defendant worked as a nuclear cardiologist for thirty-nine years prior to his suspension. On December 19, 2019, he plead guilty to third degree invasion of privacy after the police had discovered he had been secretly taking photos and videos of his daughter while she was naked in her bedroom and bathroom. This conduct took place over a five year period.
In February 2020, the trial court sentenced defendant to two years of probation and ordered him to undergo a mental health evaluation. Thereafter, the Board filed a verified complaint against defendant seeking the suspension or permanent revocation of his medical license because he committed a crime of moral turpitude. At the Board’s hearing defendant conceded liability and the hearing was only regarding the appropriate penalty. Defendant asserted that he set up the recording devices because he was concerned that his daughter was smoking marijuana in the home and he wanted to obtain evidence of that conduct. He stated the devices were not set up for his own sexual gratification. The Board rejected defendant’s claims, noted that his conduct was egregious and that he demonstrated a lack of regard for bodily dignity, privacy, confidentiality, and discretion. The Board also determined that defendant lacked credibility and that his testimony was self-serving. The Board subsequently suspended defendant’s medical license for eight years. He appealed.
On appeal, defendant argued that the Board’s decision to suspend his medical license for eight years due to a personal matter is unreasonable as it is shockingly inconsistent with fairness. The Appellate Court disagreed and affirmed the trial court’s decision substantially for the reasons stated by the Board in its through written decision. The Appellate Court agreed that defendant committed an egregious crime of moral turpitude, and the three cases he cited were not precedential and did not represent the other lengthy suspensions and revocations the Board had imposed in the past. Ultimately, the Appellate Court held that defendant’s eight year suspension did not shock their sense of fairness.
At Hark & Hark, we are experienced attorneys who represent clients for appeals for issues like the previously discussed case pertaining to the suspension of a professional license. We work hard to ensure that our clients receive exceptional representation in order for them to receive the most favorable outcome in their case as a result.
We offer payment plan options to clients financially incapable of providing full payment upfront. If you are facing a similar situation to that of the defendant in this case, please call us to discuss the matter. At Hark & Hark, we represent clients for any case in any county in New Jersey including Atlantic County, Bergen County, Burlington County, Camden County, Cape May County, Cumberland County, Essex County, Gloucester County, Hudson County, Hunterdon County, Mercer County, Middlesex County, Monmouth County, Morris County, Ocean County, Passaic County, Salem County, Somerset County, Sussex County, Union County, and Warren County and any town including Audubon, Gloucester City, Oaklyn, Audubon Park, Gloucester Township, Pennsauken, Barrington, Haddon Heights, Pine Hill, Bellmawr, Haddon Township, Pine Valley, Berlin Borough, Haddonfield, Runnemede, Berlin Township, Hi-Nella, Somerdale, Brooklawn, Laurel Springs, Stratford, Camden, Lawnside, Voorhees, Cherry Hill, Lindenwold, Waterford, Chesilhurst, Magnolia, Winslow, Clementon, Merchantville, Woodlynne, Collingswood, Mt. Ephraim, and Gibbsboro.