Utah Admin. Code 277-215-3

Current through Bulletin No. 2024-21, November 1, 2024

Section R277-215-3 - Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances

(1) In the course of evaluating a presumption described in this rule, UPPAC or the Board may consider deviating from the presumptions if:

(a) the presumption does not involve a revocation mandated by statute; and

(b) relevant aggravating or mitigating factors exist.

(2) An aggravating factor may include evidence of the following:

(a) the educator has engaged in prior misconduct;

(b) the educator presents a serious threat to a student;

(c) the educator's misconduct directly involved a student;

(d) the educator's misconduct involved a particularly vulnerable student;

(e) the educator's misconduct resulted in physical or psychological harm to a student;

(f) the educator violated multiple standards of professional conduct;

(g) the educator's attitude exhibits indifference, flippancy, disregard, or defiance towards the allegations or the consequences;

(h) the educator's misconduct continued after investigation by the LEA or UPPAC;

(i) the educator holds a position of heightened authority as an administrator;

(j) the educator's misconduct had a significant impact on the LEA or the community;

(k) the educator's misconduct was witnessed by a student;

(l) the educator was not honest or cooperative in the course of UPPAC's investigation;

(m) the educator was convicted of crime as a result of the misconduct;

(n) any other factor that, in the view of UPPAC or the Board, warrants a more serious consequence for the educator's misconduct; and

(o) the educator is on criminal probation or parole; or

(p) the Executive Secretary has issued an order of default on the educator's case as described in Rules R277-211 or R277-212.

(3) A mitigating factor may include evidence of the following:

(a) the educator's misconduct was the result of strong provocation;

(b) the educator was young and new to the profession;

(c) the educator's attitude reflects recognition of the nature and consequences of the misconduct and demonstrates a reasonable expectation that the educator will not repeat the misconduct;

(d) the educator's attitude suggests amenability to supervision and training;

(e) the educator has little or no prior disciplinary history;

(f) since the misconduct, the educator has an extended period of misconduct-free classroom time;

(g) the educator was a less active participant in a larger offense;

(h) the educator's misconduct was directed or approved, whether implicitly or explicitly, by a supervisor or person in authority over the educator;

(i) the educator has voluntarily sought treatment, counseling or training specific to the misconduct;

(j) the educator has made a timely, good faith effort to make restitution or rectify the consequences of the educator's misconduct;

(k) there was insufficient training or other policies that might have prevented the misconduct;

(l) there are substantial grounds to partially excuse or justify the educator's behavior though failing to fully excuse the violation;

(m) the educator self-reported the misconduct;

(n) the educator received a plea in abeyance from the court for criminal charges stemming from the alleged misconduct;

(o) any other factor that, in the view of UPPAC or the Board, warrants a less serious consequence for the educator's misconduct.

(4)

(a) UPPAC and the Board have sole discretion to determine the weight they give to an aggravating or mitigating factor.

(b) The weight UPPAC or the Board give an aggravating or mitigating factor may vary in each case and any one aggravating or mitigating factor may outweigh some or all other aggravating or mitigating factors.

Utah Admin. Code R277-215-3

Adopted by Utah State Bulletin Number 2020-04, effective 2/7/2020

Amended by Utah State Bulletin Number 2021-08, effective 4/8/2021