California's Broad Definition of "Substantially Related"
California professional boards discipline their members when they are convicted of crimes that are “substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of their professions”. I don’t think anyone can reasonably argue that this rule is irrational. It furthers an important public policy.
So now let’s take a look at the definition of a “substantially related” conviction. A substantially related conviction is one that "evidences present or potential unfitness of a licensee or registrant to perform the functions authorized by his license or registration in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, or welfare." Still valid.
What is invalid and completely illogical is how courts apply this definition to criminal activity. For example, a criminal conviction can affect a California pharmacist’s license. A California pharmacist can lose his/her license for suffering a DUI. And it’s not just DUIs, courts have held that lewd acts with a minor, reckless driving, and rape are all “substantially related” to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a pharmacist, entitling the Board to discipline its members for these types of convictions.
This connection is ludicrous. I could certainly understand how a drug offense would logically relate, but think that the definition of “substantially related” has been expanded too far. Looking at this definition, virtually any criminal conviction can result in a license suspension or revocation.
Whether you’re a California pharmacist, a dentist (see my July 8th blog for information on that), a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher, etc…it doesn’t matter. If you are a professional charged with any criminal act, you should immediately consult with an experienced California criminal defense attorney to help protect your career.
