#173-TTC-292
DOCKET NO. 173-TTC-292
--
TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY, DIVI- +
SION OF EDUCATIONAL PERSONNEL +
RECORDS +
+
BEFORE THE STATE
V.
JUAN GARCIA HERNANDEZ +
DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER
+
+
+
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Statement of the Case
Petitioner Texas Education Agency, Division of
Educational Personnel Records requests that the educational credentials of Juan Garcia Hernandez, Respondent, be sanctioned based upon alleged sexual conduct toward students.
Joan Howard Allen is the Hearing Officer appointed by the State Commissioner of Education. Petitioner is represented by Terry J. Johnson, Attorney at Law, Austin,
Texas. Respondent failed to timely answer the Complaint.
On April 6, 1992, the Hearing Officer issued a Proposal for Decision recommending that Petitioner's appeal be granted and Respondent's Texas Teacher Certificate be revoked. No exceptions were filed.
Findings of Fact
After due consideration of the evidence and matters officially noticed, in my capacity as State Commissioner of
Education, I make the following Findings of Fact:
1. Respondent Juan Garcia Hernandez is the holder of
Texas Teacher Certificate No. XXX-XX-XXXX, duly issued under the provisions of the Texas Education Code and its predecessor statutes. (Official Notice; Admitted).
2. By Respondent's failure to timely file his answer as required by 19 TAC ++157.10(c) and 157.66(c), all well pled allegations contained in Petitioner's Complaint are deemed true and deemed admitted.
3. At all times relevant hereto, Respondent was employed as a secondary teacher in the public schools of
Texas. (Admitted).
4. From on or about August 14, 1972 until or about
May 27, 1978, Respondent was employed as a Biology teacher for Kermit High School, in the Kermit Independent School
District, Kermit, Winkler County, Texas. (Admitted).
5. From or about August, 1978 until on or about May,
1991, Respondent was employed as a Biology teacher for the

New Caney High School, in the New Caney Independent School
District, New Caney, Montgomery County, Texas. (Admitted).
6. Respondent was born on or about November 21, 1947, and at all times relevant hereto was, as a matter of fact and of law, an adult. (Admitted).
7. Student was a student at Kermit High School from the fall semester of 1975 through the spring semester of 1979. (Admitted).
8. Commencing on or about September 1, 1976 and continuing thereafter until on or about May of 1978, and while on the campus of Kermit High School, Respondent did abuse his position of authority to initiate a progressively intimate physical relationship with Student Throughout this period of time, Respondent did engage repeatedly caress, kiss, and embrace Student and did engage in sexual intercourse with said child. (Admitted).
9. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a public school student under the age of seventeen years. (Admitted).
10. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a student in
Respondent's biology class. (Admitted).
11. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was not his spouse.
(Admitted).
12. To facilitate his iniquitous liaison and to avoid the consequences of his unlawful conduct, Respondent did abuse his position and authority as a teacher to coerce and prevent Student from revealing to her parents or to any other person the extent and nature of his relationship with the child. In furtherance of his scheme of sexual manipulation, Respondent told Student that she would be ostracized and publicly humiliated should she reveal to anyone the extent and nature of Respondent's relationship with her. (Admitted).
13. Student was a student at Kermit High School from the Fall semester of 1977 through the spring semester of 1981. (Admitted).
14. Commencing on or about March of 1978 and continuing thereafter until on or about September of 1983, and while on the campus of Kermit High School, Respondent did abuse his position of authority to initiate a progressively intimate physical relationship with Donna J.
B. Throughout this period of time, Respondent did engage repeatedly caress, kiss, and embrace Student and did engage in sexual intercourse and deviate sexual intercourse with said child. (Admitted).
15. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a public school student under the age of seventeen years. (Admitted).

16. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was not his spouse.
(Admitted).
17. To facilitate his iniquitous liaison and to avoid the consequences of his unlawful conduct, Respondent did abuse his position and authority as a teacher to coerce and prevent Student from revealing to her parents or to any other person the extent and nature of his relationship with the child. In furtherance of his scheme of sexual manipulation, Respondent told Student that she would be ostracized and publicly humiliated should she reveal to anyone the extent and nature of Respondent's relationship with her. (Admitted).
18. Student was a student at New Caney High School from the fall semester of 1983 through the spring semester of 1987. (Admitted).
19. Commencing on or about March of 1985 and continuing thereafter until on or about May of 1987, and while on the campus of New Caney High School, Respondent did abuse his position of authority to initiate a progressively intimate physical relationship with Student Throughout this period of time, Respondent did engage repeatedly caress, kiss, and embrace Student and did engage in sexual intercourse and deviate sexual intercourse with said child.
(Admitted).
20. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a public school student under the age of seventeen years. (Admitted).
21. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a student in Respondent's biology class. (Admitted).
22. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was not his spouse.
(Admitted).
23. To facilitate his iniquitous liaison and to avoid the consequences of his unlawful conduct, Respondent did abuse his position and authority as a teacher to coerce and prevent Student from revealing to her parents or to any other person the extent and nature of his relationship with the child. In furtherance of his scheme of sexual manipulation, Respondent told Student that she would be ostracized and publicly humiliated should she reveal to anyone the extent and nature of Respondent's relationship with her. (Admitted).
24. Student was a student at New Caney High School from the fall semester of 1986 through the spring semester of 1990. (Admitted).
25. Commencing on or about September 1, 1987 and continuing thereafter until on or about May of 1988, and while on the campus of New Caney High School, Respondent did

abuse his position of authority to initiate a progressively intimate physical relationship with Student Throughout this period of time, Respondent did engage repeatedly caress, kiss, and embrace Student and did engage in deviate sexual intercourse with said child. (Admitted).
26. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a public school student under the age of seventeen years. (Admitted).
27. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was a student in Respondent's biology class. (Admitted).
28. At the time he initiated said relationship,
Respondent knew that Student was not his spouse.
(Admitted).
29. To facilitate his iniquitous liaison and to avoid the consequences of his unlawful conduct, Respondent did abuse his position and authority as a teacher to coerce and prevent Student from revealing to her parents or to any other person the extent and nature of his relationship with the child. In furtherance of his scheme of sexual manipulation, Respondent told Student that she would be ostracized and publicly humiliated should she reveal to anyone the extent and nature of Respondent's relationship with her. (Admitted).
30. At all times relevant hereto Respondent knew or in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment should have known, that his conduct posed a serious risk of harm to the well-being of the children involved, but Respondent did pursue his course of conduct in wanton disregard of the consequences of his actions. (Admitted).
Discussion
Respondent Juan Garcia Hernandez, a certified educator, has clearly used his position of trust in the public schools to obtain sexual benefits from students. This behavior renders Respondent unworthy to instruct the youth of the state. As an independent ground, Respondent's intimidation of the students and his interference with the authority of the students' parents and the school administration also render Respondent unworthy to instruct the youth of this state.
Unworthiness to instruct the youth of the state under
Tex. Educ. Code +13.046 has been defined as a lack of worth and absence of those moral and mental qualities required to enable one to render service essential to the accomplishment of the object which the law had in view. Marrs v. Matthews,
270 S.W. 586 (Tex. Civ. App.--Texarkana 1925 writ ref'd).
Respondent is devoid of the moral qualities necessary to educate the youth of the state. He should be permanently removed from the field of education. Petitioner's appeal is granted and Respondent's Texas Teacher Certificate should be

revoked.
Conclusions of Law
After due consideration of the record, matters officially noticed, and the foregoing Findings of Fact, in my capacity as State Commissioner of Education, I make the following Conclusions of Law:
1. The Commissioner of Education has jurisdiction over the instant appeal pursuant to Tex. Educ. Code +13.046.
2. Petitioner's Motion to Deem Allegations as True and Admitted is hereby GRANTED, due to Respondent's failure to timely answer.
3. Respondent Juan Garcia Hernandez, holder of Texas
Teacher Certificate No. XXX-XX-XXXX, is unworthy to instruct the youth of this state by virtue of his actions to engage in sexual intercourse and deviate sexual intercourse with four female students under the age of seventeen years and not the spouses of Respondent while Respondent was employed as an educator by the students' districts.
4. Respondent Juan Garcia Hernandez, holder of Texas
Teacher Certificate No. XXX-XX-XXXX, is unworthy to instruct the youth of this state by virtue of his actions to abuse his position and authority as a teacher to coerce and prevent four female students from revealing to their parents or to any other person the extent and nature of his relationship with the students.
5. Respondent Juan Garcia Hernandez, holder of Texas
Teacher Certificate No. XXX-XX-XXXX, is unworthy to instruct the youth of this state by virtue of his actions to tell the four students that they would be ostracized and publicly humiliated should they revealed to anyone the extent and nature of Respondent's relationship with them.
6. Respondent's Texas Teacher Certificate No.
XXX-XX-XXXX should be REVOKED.
7. Respondent should return the teacher's copy of
Respondent's Texas Teacher Certificate to the Texas
Education Agency, Division of Educational Personnel Records.
8. The Texas Education Agency, Division of
Educational Personnel Records should prepare and distribute appropriate notices notifying the public of the revocation of Respondent's teacher certificate.
7. Petitioner's appeal should be granted.
O R D E R
After due consideration of the record, matters officially noticed, and the foregoing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, in my capacity as State Commissioner of
Education, it is hereby
ORDERED that Respondent's Texas Teacher Certificate No.
XXX-XX-XXXX be, and is hereby, REVOKED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent immediately return the teacher's copy of Respondent's Texas Teacher

Certificate to the Texas Education Agency, Division of
Educational Personnel Records.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Texas Education Agency,
Division of Educational Personnel Records prepare and distribute appropriate notices notifying the public of the revocation of Respondent's teacher certificate.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's appeal be, and is hereby, GRANTED.
SIGNED AND ISSUED this ______ day of ________________,
1992.
______________________________
LIONEL R. MENO
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION