Section 3337-4-02 - Ohio university judicial system(A) Section 1. Purpose. The primary purpose of the Ohio university judicial system shall be to help govern the university community by regulating student conduct and enforcing the code of student conduct consistent with the principles of due process of law applicable to state universities.(B) Section 2. Establishment of judicial bodies. The Ohio university judicial system shall be the responsibility of the dean of students; and the office of legal affairs shall administer the system. The assistant director of legal affairs shall be the director of the operation of the judicial system and shall serve on the staff of the dean of students in fulfilling that responsibility.(C) Section 3. Jurisdiction. (1) University judiciary---The university judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all violations of code Aof the code of student conduct. This shall include, among other things, review of cases of students arrested and/ or convicted of criminal offenses, presidential interim, suspensions, matters of academic misconduct, and felonious thefts. The university judiciary shall also have jurisdiction over organizational conduct. A student or student organization may choose either to have a hearing at the university by a university hearing board, or a designated hearing officer, ususally the director of university judiciaries.(2) University appeal board-The university appeal board shall, hear appeals from decisions of the university judiciary.(3) Administrative judiciary---The administrative judiciary shall have jurisdiction over code B offenses and all code Coffenses not handled by residence judiciaries. Upon request by the student (written appeal within seventy-two hours), decisions may be reviewed by the director of university judiciaries. In cases where the director served as the original hearing officer, appeals will go to the university appeal board.(4) Residence judiciaries--The residence judiciaries shall have jurisdiction over all violations of code C except for those handled by the administrative judiciary. The violations involve conduct in the residence halls and will result in a sanction less than university disciplinary probation. Upon request by the student (written appeal within seventy-two hours), decisions may be reviewed by the director of university judiciaries.
(D) Section 4. Composition. (1) University judiciary-The university judiciary is composed of either the director of university judiciaries or his or her designee who shall be the hearing officer at an administrative hearing, or a five-person university hearing board composed of three students, one faculty member and one administrator. The director shall serve as a nonvoting hearing officer for the hearing board. The director shall appoint on a rotating and random basis a hearing board from a pool of twenty-three board members, who shall be appointed by the committee on committees for a one year term, and will be called the judiciaries committee. The pool shall consist of thirteen students (ten at the undergraduate level and three at the graduate level), five administrators, and five faculty members. Every reasonable attempt shall be made to assure that all classes of undergraduate students are represented on the judiciaries committee. Members are eligible for reappointment. Once five board members have been selected in accordance with the above procedures and have agreed to serve on a case, three of the five shall constitute a quorum, so long as two of the three are students. A hearing board for the summer session will be appointed each year by the office of legal affairs from the original hearing board membership for the preceding year.(2) University appeal board--The university appeal board shall consist of three members, including one faculty member, one student, and one administrator. These three members shall be selected from the judiciaries committee, and shall be appointed for each appeal on a random basis by the director of university judiciaries. The director shall also appoint one of the selected members as chairperson, who shall have a vote in all appeals. The director shall appoint a member of the judiciaries committee in the event that a board member cannot be present at an appeals hearing.(3) Administrative judiciary-The administrative judiciary shall consist of a single hearing officer, who shall be the director of university judiciaries or a staff member of the university judiciaries.(4) Residence judiciaries-The residence judiciaries shall consist of the three green coordinators, each of whom shall have jurisdiction over violations which occur on his or her green.(E) Section 5. Judicial procedures. (1) University judiciary. (a) A student appearing before the university judiciary shall be notified in writing of the hearing at least three days (seventy-two hours) in advance. This notification shall include;(i) a statement of the rule or regulation the student allegedly violated,(ii) a specific statement of the operative facts constituting the alleged violation,(iii) the time and place of the hearing, and(iv) a statement of the policies and procedures to be followed at the hearing. If the student fails to appear at a scheduled hearing and his or her absence is not excused, the hearing may proceed without him or her. Hearings shall be closed unless specifically requested to be open by the student. Hearings can be rescheduled with permission of the director of university judiciaries.(b) When charged with a violation of university regulations before university judiciaries, a student shall have the right by request to have his or her hearing before the director of university judiciaries (hereinafter referred to as an administrative hearing), or before a hearing board (hereinafter referred to as a board hearing) The director may not overrule a student's selection of a board hearing, and he or she must honor a student's request to have an administrative hearing.(c) A student may request that any member of the Ohio university community, or his or her parents, or legal counsel assist in his or her presentation of the case. If a student so desires, he or she may request counseling or aid concerning his or her case from a volunteer student organization currently known as "Students Defending Students". Legal counsel may assist the student in presenting a defense at the hearing according to the university judiciaries procedures. If a student wishes to have legal counsel present at the hearing, he or she must inform the director of university judiciaries, at least two days (forty-eight hours) prior to the hearing.(d) In cases before the university hearing board a student may ask for the removal of any member of the hearing board, except for the hearing officer, by showing written or verbal evidence of bias against him or her on the part of the member. The hearing officer will determine whether a student's charge of bias is valid or invalid. If bias is shown, the member will be excused by the hearing officer. A charge of bias on the part of the hearing officer may be submitted to the dean of students for review.(e) The student has the right to speak or not to speak on his or her own behalf, and the right to remain silent when questioned. At no time will the student be forced to speak against himself or herself nor will the right to remain silent be used against him or her. The student has the right to present any evidence on his or her behalf, including witnesses and written or testimonial character references. All written evidence must be presented to the hearing officer for authentication before admission to evidence.(f) The director of university judiciaries shall be a nonvoting hearing officer in all cases before a hearing board. If the director cannot serve, he or she shall appoint a substitute hearing officer.(g) Three members shall constitute a quorum, so long as at least two students and one faculty member or one administrator are present.(h) An official record of all proceedings shall be kept by the university judiciaries. The record shall normally be a tape recording of the hearing.(i) The hearing officer, acting in an official university capacity, shall assure an orderly hearing process, so that the policies protecting the accused student ' and other parties are upheld. The general operating procedure of a board hearing is as follows: (i) The hearing officer shall insure that the student understands the policies and procedures of the hearing. Then, the hearing officer shall instruct the hearing board of its obligation to make a factual determination of whether the student's actions violated the charged university regulations, and, if so, to decide the sanction to be recommended.(ii) The complainant and student shall present their evidence as to the alleged violation. The evidence against the accused student shall be presented by the complainant. The hearing board members and the hearing officer may examine all written evidence and question all witnesses.(iii) The hearing officer has the responsibility to insure the orderly conduct of the hearing and development of the evidence. He or she shall rule on all procedureal questions raised during the hearing and on the admissibility of all evidence.(iv) The student and the complainant shall have the right to examine and counter all the evidence, including the right to examine all written evidence and question all witnesses. The student has a right in the process of the actual hearing to request the names of all witnesses against him or her.(v) After the evidence has been presented, the complainant and the student, in that order, shall summarize their positions. The hearing officer shall instruct the hearing board of its responsibilities to determine by majority vote whether, from the preponderance of the evidence, there was a violation of university regulations. The board shall then go into closed session to make this determination.(vi) The majority of the hearing board shall determine whether the student committed the offense. In the case of a tie vote, the hearing officer will cast the deciding vote. The student then has the opportunity to present mitigating evidence, including statements by character witnesses; and the complainant may rebut any evidence so presented. Afterwards the hearing board will vote on the sanction to be recommended. The hearing board shall consider the following things in making its decision: (a) the evidence presented, at the hearing;(b) the prior disciplinary record of the student;(c) disciplinary precedent;(d) the guidelines specified in the code of student conduct as detailed by the hearing officer.(vii) If the hearing board determines that a sanction is to be recommended, the board will inform the student and tine bearing officer of its' decision. Individual board members may speak to the recommended sanction. The hearing officer will have the responsibility to sanction the student and will accept the board's recommendation if reasonable; but he or she may approve a different sanction as determined by the criteria specified in paragraph (E)(1)(vi).(j) At an administrative hearing the same procedures apply with the hearing officer determining whether a violation of the code of student conduct occurred and the sanction to be imposed.(2) University appeal board. (a) The accused student and the complainant have a "right to file a written appeal within three days (seventy-two hours) after notification of sanction imposed by the university judiciaries to the university appeal board on the grounds of (i) new evidence, (ii) a defect in judicial procedures, or (iii) inappropriate sanction. Appeal board members cannot be persons who served on the original hearing board. The appeal board shall, within a reasonable time, in closed session after the opinions have been filed, and by majority vote either grant an appeal hearing or deny the appeal. If the hearing is granted, the appeal may be denied upholding the sanction; granted, and a new hearing ordered; or granted, and the sanction changed. The board will be limited to ordering a new hearing to the extent that in their judgment a defect in the original hearing is found which was sufficiently substantial to have changed the outcome in a significant manner. In considering the evidence presented at the hearing, it will order a new hearing on the merits only if a reasonable person could not have found as the hearing board, or the hearing officer, if an administrative hearing, did find on factual matters; and in considering the change of the sanction by reducing or increasing it, it will do so only in the clear abuse of discretion by the hearing officer, not as a matter of substituting the appeal board's judgment for that of the hearing officer.(b) If an appeal is granted by the appeal board, the procedures for the appeal shall be as follows: (i) Once the written appeal has been granted, an appeal hearing will be held within a reasonable time, not to exceed seven days, convenient to the student, the complainant, and the appeal board.(ii) An official record of the appeal hearing shall be kept by the university judiciaries.(iii) The accused student may be represented by his or her parents, a member of the university community, or by legal counsel.(iv) The appellant may present all reasonable new evidence or arguments to show the merits of the appeal. The appellee may present evidence in rebuttal. Evidence by the appellant shall not be considered as requiring a new hearing below unless the evidence shows that the members of the hearing board or the hearing officer were apparently unreasonable in judgment as to procedural fairness or sanction imposed. To the extent the evidence meets the standards in paragraph (B)(2)(a) above, the university appeal board can grant a new hearing below.(v) The chairperson shall determine the procedures of the appeal hearing and preserve its orderly operation and request the director of university judiciaries to provide all pertinent information.(vi) The appeal board shall make the final determination by majority vote as to whether the appeal of the original decision will be(a) denied, upholding the sanction; (b) granted and a new hearing ordered; or (c) granted, and the sanction changed.(vii) Once the appeal board has made the determination, the student and the director of university judiciaries shall be notified in writing of the decision by the chairperson within three days (seventy-two hours) from the conclusion of the appeal hearing.(viii) Normally the decision of the appeal board is final. However, written. appeals under extremely unusual circumstances may be made to the office of the president.(3) Administrative judiciaries. (a) The student appearing before the administrative judiciaries shall be notified in writing of the hearing at least three days (seventy-two hours) in advance; except in the case of a violation of code C which requires twenty-four hour notice. This notification shall include (i) a statement of the rule or regulation the student allegedly violated, (ii) a specific statement of the operative facts constituting the alleged violation, (iii) the time and place of the hearing, and (iv) a statement of the policies and procedures to be followed at the hearing. A student may waive the three-day notice and a formal hearing at the administrative judiciary level. If the student fails to appear at a scheduled heaving, without being excused, the hearing may proceed without him or her.(b) The hearing officer of the administrative judiciaries shall assure an orderly hearing process so that the policies protecting the student are upheld. The general operating procedure of a hearing is as follows: The hearing officer shall insure the student understands the policies and procedures of the hearing. The complainant and the student in that order shall present their evidence as to the alleged violation. The student and the complainant have the opportunity to examine all "written evidence and question all witnesses. The hearing officer may examine all written evidence and question all witnesses.
(c) The hearing officer shall have the responsibility to insure the proper development of the evidence. He or she shall rule on all procedural questions raised during the hearing and on the admissibility of all evidence to be presented.(d) After the evidence has been presented, the complainant and the student, in that order, shall summarize their positions. The hearing officer shall determine whether from the preponderance of the evidence there was a violation of university regulations, and if so, what sanction should be imposed,(e) If a violation of university regulations is found, the hearing officer shall then, after his or her study, impose an appropriate sanction as determined by him or her from (i). the evidence presented at the hearing,(ii) the prior disciplinary record of the student,(iii) disciplinary precedent, and (iv) the guidelines specified in the code of student conduct, codes B or C.(f) The hearing officer shall forward a written report of his or her decision to the student and to the 'director of university judiciaries for placement in the student's official disciplinary file. Decisions of the hearing officer are subject to review according to the appeal procedure.(4) Residence judiciaries. (a) A student referred to the residence judiciaries shall have the case heard by the appropriate green coordinator, who shall have jurisdiction over violations of code C offenses, provided these occurred in or affected the residence hall system specifically on the green for which the coordinator is responsible. The coordinator has the right to transfer jurisdiction in a case to the administrative judiciaries with permission of the director of university judiciaries.(b) Once a green coordinator has received a referral, he or she shall serve written or verbal notice within twenty-four hours to the student to appear at at specified time and place. Once a meeting is scheduled the case may proceed without the student should he or she fail to appear without being excused.(c) The green coordinator shall be responsible for assuring that the student has a change to present his or her position. Following persentation of the evidence that there was a violation of university regulations, the student shall be entitled to present testimony or evidence in his or her own behalf.(d) The green coordinator shall determine whether from the preponderance of the evidence there was a violation of university regulations, and if so, impose a sanction in accordance with guidelines specified in the code of student conduct, code C(e) The green coordinator shall forward a written report of his or her decision to the student and to the director of university judiciaries for placement in the student's official university file. Decisions of the coordinator are subject to review by the director according to the appeal procedure.Ohio Admin. Code 3337-4-02
Effective: 3/14/2015
Promulgated Under: 111.15
Statutory Authority: 111.15
Rule Amplifies: 111.15
Prior Effective Dates: 3/16/1978