' BEFORE THE TEACHER STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION
ii i OE THE STATE OF OREGON
In the Matter of the Teaching License of: I
FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT
MARY ANNA SWEARINGEN
Case N0. 103942
On July 17, 2002 the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (Commission) issued

a Notice of Opportunity for Hearing to Mary Anna Swearingen, in which the Commission
proposed t0 deny Ms. Swearingen’s application for an Oregon Teaching License.
Ms. Swearingen requested a hearing. On October 21, 2002, the Commission filed an Amended
Notice of Hearing, and the case was scheduled for hearing before Administrative Law Judge
Steve Rissberger on January 17, 2003. On December 23. 2002, Walter F. Brown, Attorney at

. Law, wrote a letter to Mr. Rissberger indicating he had agreed to represent Ms. Swearingen and

i requested a postponement. Mr. Rissberger granted the request for postponement and rescheduled
the case for hearing on March 10, 2003. On that date, a hearing was held, and Mr. Rissberger
heard testimony from several witnesses and admitted various exhibits into evidence. The hearing
was then continued t0 April 25, 2003. On April 18, 2003, Mr. Brown requested another
postponement on several grounds. He also informed Mr. Rissberger that he and Ms. Swearingen
were married on March 30, 2003. Mr. Rissberger granted the Motion for Postponement and
rescheduled the hearing for June 26, 2003i On March 20, 2003, Mr. Brown withdrew as
Ms. Swearingen’s attorney. On June l8. 2002, Attorney Steven J. Sherlag informed
Mr. Rissberger that he had been retained to represent Ms. Swearingen in this case and requested
a postponement. On June 24, 2003. Mr. Rissberger granted a postponement, and the case was
eventually re-scheduled for December 10, 2003.

rage l 4 FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Swearingen, Mary Anna)
JGM1jaw/GENH175862

. On September 8, 2003, the Commission filed a Second Amended Notice of Hearing
which proposed to deny Ms. Swearingen’s application for a teaching license and to revoke her
right to apply for a teaching license under ORS 342.175(l). On December 2, 2003, Mr. Sherlag
wrote a letter to Mr. Rissberger indicating on behalf of Ms. Swearingen that she was
withdrawing her application for a teaching license and that she intended to allow the
Commission to enter a default order on the Second Amended Notice of Hearing. Based 0n the
above. the Commission finds Ms. Swear-ingen to be in default and enters this Order by Default
based on the hearing record to date and the files and records of the Commission. The Findings
of Fact set forth below are based on the Commission’s files and records, including exhibits Al
through All ofthe hearing file in this case.

FINDINGS OF FACT

l. Mary Anna Swearingenl held an Oregon Basic Teaching License from May 27,

' 1977 to March 29, I981, when the license expired. She next held a Substitute Oregon Teaching
License from May 14, 1996 to March 29, 2000, when the license expired.

2. On November 5, 1994, Ms. Swearingcn married Clayton Victor Swearingen.
There is one child born of this marriage, Shayann Machaela Swearingen, born August 22, 1995. i

3. The Swearingens were divorced on September 22, I997, and the court awarded
custody of Shayann to Ms. Swearingen, subject t0 Mr. Swearingen’s rights to reasonable and
seasonable visitation.

4. In about December 1999, Ms. Swearingen made allegations to child protective
service agencies in Washington and in Oregon that her former husband had sexually abused
Shayann. Child protective agencies in both Oregon and Washington investigated these

‘age 2 _ FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Swearingen, Mary Anna)

JGM:jaw/GENI-Il75862

1
' allegations and concluded that they were unsubstantiated. During this period, Ms. Swearingen
attempted to obtain restraining orders against Mr. Swearingen in hoth Washington and Oregon;
the courts in each state denied these motions.

5. On March 31, 2000, Mr. Swearingen obtained a custody order in Multnomah
County Circuit Court, awarding him temporary custody of Shayann.

6. In the early spring of 2000, Ms. Swearingen left her home with Shayann and with
two children by a previous marriage without informing Mr. Swearingen. She later admitted that
she removed Shayann in order to prevent Mr. Swearingen from having access to her.

7. Ms. Swearingen first attempted to take the children to Canada. When she was
denied access by Canadian officials, Ms. Swearingen put the children on a bus and traveled to
Dallas, Texas. During the next several months, Ms. Swearingen and the children lived in various

. locations, including homeless shelters in Texas and Louisiana. Throughout this period,
Ms. Swearingen did not inform Mr. Swearingen or the child protective services agencies of her
location or the location of Shayann.

8. On November 22. 2000, Ms. Swearingen and the children were apprehended by
FBI agents in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Ms. Swearingen was taken into custody and the children
were returned to their father in Oregon.

9. On January l 1, 2001 . Ms. Swearingen appeared at the Multnomah County District
Attorney’s office and was interviewed by Detective Sergeant J. Eekhart of the Portland Police
Bureau. In that interview Ms. Swearingen acknowledged that she had removed the children
without hcr husbands consent and had deliberately concealed her location and Shayann‘s

location for several months. She continued to make allegation of sexual abuse against
—___________—_________—_.___—__—_._—~
‘ I Ms. Swearingen was married in March 2003 and has changed her name to Mary Anna Brown.
age 3 — FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Swearingen, Mary Anita)
JGszaw/GENH175862

' Mr. Swearingen. She expressed no remorse for her actions and told Officer Eckhart that she
would attempt to remove Shayann again if given the opportunity.

10. Based on the above, Ms. Swearingen was charged with a crime. She entered a
plea of no contest and was convicted in Multnomah County Circuit Court of the crime of
Custodial Interference in the Second Degree on October 1, 2001.

11. After Shayann was returned to him, Mr. Swearin gen obtained a restraining order
in the Clackamas County Circuit Court on January 19. 2001. This order restrained
Ms. Swearingen from intimidating, molesting, interfering or menacing Mr. Swearingen or
Shayann. The order further restrained Ms. Swearingen from entering or attempting to enter
Mr. Swearingen‘s residence and place of employment or Shayann’s school.

12. On February 25. 2002, the Multnomah County Circuit Court awarded permanent
custody of Shayann to Mr. Swearingen. The court found in its order that Ms. Swearingen “is on

. a campaign to prove that [Mr Swearingen] has abused the parties’ child. Her allegations of
abuse are unfounded.” Based on recommendations of the child’s psychologist, the court ordered
that Ms. Swearingen have no parenting time with Shayann and that Ms. Swearingen not be
allowed supervised parenting times until she had undergone therapy with a psychologist for a
sustained period of time.

13. On December 24, 2001, Ms. Swearingen appeared at Mr. Swearingen’s residence
unannounced and without Mr. Swearingen’s consent. She refused to leave the house after
Mr. Swearingen requested that she do so. As a result, she was charged with contempt of court
for violation of the restraining order.

l4. On April 22, 2002, Ms. Swearingen was found guilty by the Clackamas County
Circuit Court of violation of a restraining order and contempt of court. The court placed her on

‘age 4 — FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Swearingen, Mary Anna)

JGM:jaw/GENH175862

’ probation for 12 months. required that she have no contact with Mr. Swearingen and get a mental
health evaluation and treatment as recommended by the evaluator.
CONCLUSIONS 0F LAW
l. Ms. Swearingen’s conviction for Custodial Interference in the Second Degree
constitutes gross unfitness in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(5)(c).
2. Ms. Swearingen’s conviction of contempt for violation of a restraining order on
December 24, 2001, constitutes gross unfitncss in violation of OAR 584~020»0040(5)(c).
DISCUSSION AND ORDER
Because Ms. Swearingen has withdrawn her application for a teaching license, any issue
concerning the Commission’s denial of the license is moot. However, the Commission retains
the authority to decide whether to suspend or revoke her right to apply for a license. In
' determining an appropriate sanction, the Commission looks at the factors listed under OAR 584-
020-0045 and any other relevant factors. The Commission finds it significant that Ms.
Swearingen has expressed no remorse for her actions, and that she told Officer Eckhart that she
would abscond with Shayann again if given the opportunity. Her action involved the welfare of
a 4 1/2 year—old child and indicates that she may not be trusted to provide a safe and secure
environment for children in a school setting. She has shown a disregard for the law and a refusal
to follow legal processes if they do not serve her purposes. For these reasons, a revocation of
Ms. Swearingen’s right to apply for a license is appropriate. ‘
\\\ l
\\\ i
\\\
.age 5 i FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Sit/caringen, Mary Anna)
JGM1jaw/GENHI75862

l

. Based on the foregoing, the right ofMary Anna Swearingen to apply for an Oregon

Teaching License is revoked.
5W
1T IS SO ORDERED this Z day of January 2004.
TEAC R STAND ‘ AND PRAC ICES COMMISSION
'ctoria Chambe alain, Executive Director

APPEAL RIGHTS: You are entitled to judicial review of this order in accordance with ORS
Chapter 183.480. You may requestjudicial review by filing a petition with the Court of Appeals
in Salem, Oregon within 60 days from the date 0f this order. Tape recordings of Administrative
Hearings are retained 90 days after the date of the final order.

.age 6 — FINAL ORDER BY DEFAULT (TSPC v. Swearingen, Mary Alma)

JGszaw/GENI-I175862