President's Directive No. 9

University Policy Regarding the Use of Attorneys in Student Conduct Proceedings

This Directive is issued pursuant to Article III, Section D of Executive Order No.1073.

Use of Attorneys in Student Conduct Proceedings

Pre-Hearing Conference

Neither the university nor the student(s) under investigation may have an attorney present at the Pre-Hearing Conference provided for in Article IV, Section B of Executive Order No.1073. This restriction does not prohibit either the university or the student(s) under investigation from consulting with an attorney; it prohibits any party from being represented by an attorney, or having an attorney present, at the Pre-Hearing Conference.

The Student Conduct Administrator (“Administrator”) holding the Pre-Hearing Conference may not be an attorney.

Hearing

No party; whether the university, the students(s) charged or the complainant; may have an attorney present at the Hearing provided for in Article IV, Section D of Executive Order No.1073. This restriction does not prohibit the university, the student(s) charged or the complainant from consulting with an attorney; it prohibits any party from being represented by an attorney, or having an attorney present, at the Hearing.

Neither the Administrator representing the university at the Hearing nor the Administrator's advisor may be an attorney. The Hearing Officer may be a campus official, an attorney admitted to practice law in California or an administrative law judge from the Office of Administrative Hearings.

As provided for in Article III, Section D.1.b. of Executive Order No. 1073, only in cases where (a) there are pending criminal (felony) charges arising out of the same facts that are the subject of the disciplinary proceeding or (b) the recommended sanction is expulsion may an attorney attend the Hearing provided for in Article IV, Section D of Executive Order No. 1073.

Date: April 23, 2012
Acknowledged by: Willie J. Hagan, Interim President