LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v RODNEY L. HINKLE Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: 34-48574, Defendant: Rodney L. Hinkle, Plaintiff: SEC, State: FL Florida, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>34-48574, Securities, Maryland, Hinkle, Commission, Act, Violations, Administrative Proceedings, Exchange, Pursuant, Alleges, Consent Order, Order Instituting, Cease, Desist/order, Permanent, Broker-dealer, Barred Hinkle, Administrative Law Judge, Investment Advisory Business, Allegations, Rodney, Sarbanes-oxley Act, Enforcement, Engaging, False Representations, Promises, Sell Securities, Multi-financial Securities Corporation, Registered Broker-dealer , ContentID: 120255594

Case Documents
1 2003-09-30 SEC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 132884
2 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 2 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
MARYLAND
HINKLE
COMMISSION
ACT
VIOLATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
EXCHANGE
PURSUANT
BUSINESS
ALLEGES
CONSENT ORDER
ORDER INSTITUTING
CEASE
DESIST/ORDER
PERMANENT
BROKER-DEALER
BARRED HINKLE
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
INVESTMENT ADVISORY BUSINESS
ALLEGATIONS
RODNEY
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
ENFORCEMENT
ENGAGING
FALSE REPRESENTATIONS
PROMISES
SELL SECURITIES
MULTI-FINANCIAL SECURITIES CORPORATION
REGISTERED BROKER-DEALER
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Release No. 48574 / September 30, 2003

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-11288

Administrative Proceedings Instituted Against Rodney L. Hinkle Pursuant To
Section 604 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act

   On September 30, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission
   ("Commission") issued an Order Instituting Public Administrative
   Proceedings Pursuant to Section 15(b)(6) of the Securities Exchange
   Act of 1934 ("Order") against Rodney L. Hinkle ("Hinkle"), of Jupiter,
   Florida based on the entry of a Final Order to Cease and Desist/Order
   of Permanent Bar ("Final Order") issued against Hinkle by the
   Commissioner of the Securities Division, State of Maryland, Office of
   the Attorney General ("Maryland Division"). This is the first
   enforcement action brought pursuant to Section 604 of the
   Sarbanes-Oxley Act which, among other things, authorizes the
   Commission to censure or restrict associated persons of broker-dealers
   who are subject to any final order of a State securities commission
   that bars such persons from engaging in the securities business.
   Pursuant to the Final Order, the Maryland Division barred Hinkle from
   engaging in the securities business in Maryland, among other things.

   In the Order, the Division of Enforcement ("Division") alleges that on
   June 17, 2003, the Maryland Division issued the Final Order against
   Hinkle and two of his companies based upon Hinkle's violation of a
   Consent Order it had issued against him on June 12, 2000, as well as
   violations of the Maryland Securities Act. , No. 2002-0422 (June 17,
   2003). The Division further alleges that according to the Final Order,
   the Consent Order found that Hinkle had engaged in the fraudulent sale
   of unregistered securities and ordered, among other things, that
   Hinkle permanently cease and desist from certain securities law
   violations and be barred from the securities and investment advisory
   business in Maryland for four years. Moreover, the Division alleges
   that, as set forth in the Final Order, the Maryland Division found
   that Hinkle used false representations and promises to sell securities
   to investors in Maryland and elsewhere, and that he committed this
   conduct in July 1997, while still associated with Multi-Financial
   Securities Corporation, a registered broker-dealer, and from
   approximately January 2000 to May 2001, at which time he was no longer
   associated with a broker-dealer.

   The Division alleges that in the Final Order the Maryland Division
   found that Hinkle violated the terms of the Consent Order as well as
SNIPPETS:
  • U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  • Administrative Proceedings Instituted Against Rodney L. Hinkle Pursuant To Section 604 Of The
  • On September 30, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order Instituting
  • This is the first enforcement action brought pursuant to Section 604 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
  • In the Order, the Division of Enforcement alleges that on June 17, 2003, the Maryland
  • The Division further alleges that according to the Final Order, the Consent Order found that
  • Moreover, the Division alleges that, as set forth in the Final Order, the Maryland Division
  • The Division alleges that in the Final Order the Maryland Division found that Hinkle violated
  • A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge to determine whether the
  • The Commission directed that an administrative law judge shall issue an initial decision in
  •    |