Judicial Procedures for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct (2009-10)

Copied below is the 2009-10 academic year version of the Code of Student Life Judicial Procedures, which are applicable for incidents that occurred on or before August 13, 2010.  After this date, the 2010-11 version of the rules are applicable.

1. Introduction. 
   Complaints of sexual misconduct are resolved under the procedures set forth below.  Formal complaints about sexual misconduct by a student are made to the UI Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator (335-6200).  When a complaint of sexual misconduct is filed with the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator, the dean of students shall designate an administrator to investigate the complaint.  The administrator designated by the dean is referred to below as the Sexual Misconduct Enforcement Officer (SMEO).  The SMEO has authority to impose non-suspension disciplinary sanctions (including housing eviction) in cases where the accused student is found responsible for violating one or more University conduct rules.  In cases where the allegations indicate that a university suspension is warranted if the accused student is found guilty, the complaint will be resolved at a formal administrative hearing conducted by a Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator.  At a formal hearing, the SMEO may be assigned the role of charging officer.
   
   The sexual misconduct procedures outlined below are controlling in those cases where one or more of the allegations arising out of a single incident involve sexual misconduct.  In order to comply with federal law, the sexual misconduct procedures differ in several respects from the Judicial Procedure for Alleged Violations of the Code of Student Life outlined in “B-a” above.  Part-time student-employees who are accused of committing sexual harassment within the scope of their teaching or research work are subject to these procedures as well as the procedures under the University Policy on Sexual Harassment, which governs University employees.
   
   Sexual misconduct is defined in the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy as unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature that is committed without consent or by force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation (refer to http://www.uiowa.edu/~our/opmanual/iv/02.htm).  Sexual misconduct includes sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexual exploitation, and sexual intimidation.  The dean of students may also elect to resolve stalking complaints, no-contact order violations, and/or dating violence under these procedures.  In those cases where a Code of Student Life rule (such as excessive noise or failure to cooperate with staff) related to the same incident was allegedly violated in addition to sexual misconduct, the dean may elect to resolve all of the allegations through the Judicial Procedures for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct.  For purposes of these procedures, all rules allegedly violated are referred to below as “sexual misconduct rules.”  
2. Investigation by the SMEO. 
   Following receipt of a complaint, the Sexual Misconduct Enforcement Officer (SMEO) will gather relevant evidence to determine whether sexual misconduct rules were violated.  Ordinarily, the SMEO will communicate with the person(s) adversely affected by the alleged misconduct.  A victim of sexual misconduct has the right to meet with the SMEO and tell his/her side of the story, to submit documents and other relevant evidence for consideration by the SMEO, to bring an advisor to the meeting with the SMEO, and to identify witnesses who may have information relevant to the complaint.  A person subjected to sexual misconduct has the right to submit a victim impact statement to the SMEO during the investigation.  At the option of the victim, the victim impact statement may include recommendations for sanction.  The SMEO has the authority to issue interim sanctions as explained below in sub-section 9.  
   
   The investigation process is not open to the public.  To ensure student confidentiality, the process followed shall comply with all federal rules governing student record information.  In those cases where a student is accused of sexual assault, the SMEO shall refrain from asking questions of any party or witness relating to the past sexual history of the victim which would be excluded in a criminal case (per Iowa Ct. R. 5.412).  
   
   The student accused of sexual misconduct will be notified of the allegations in writing by the SMEO in order to notify him or her of the allegations and explain the Judicial Procedures for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct.  The accused has the right to meet with the SMEO and tell his/her side of the story, to submit documents and other relevant evidence for consideration by the SMEO, to bring an advisor to the meeting with the SMEO, and to identify witnesses who may have information relevant to the complaint.  
   
   While the SMEO’s investigation is pending, the person who brought the complaint and the person accused of misconduct each have the right to know, upon request, of the status of the investigation.  The student accused of sexual misconduct may consult with the University Ombudsperson and/or other advisers during the investigation.  The person bringing the complaint may consult with the UI Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator and/or an advisor or counselor during the investigation. 
   
   
3. Decision by the SMEO. 
   Depending upon the outcome of the SMEO’s investigation, a complaint may be resolved in one of three ways: (1) a recommendation to the dean of students to dismiss the sexual misconduct allegations without sanctions; (2) a finding by the SMEO that the accused student violated a sexual misconduct rule (and possibly other rules) and that non-suspension sanctions should be imposed; or (3) a decision by the SMEO, in consultation with the dean of students, to order a formal hearing to resolve the complaint and recommend that the accused student be suspended from the University if the hearing adjudicator determines that the accused student violated sexual misconduct rules.  The process for conducting suspension hearings is outlined below in sub-section 6. 
4. Decision to Impose Sanctions other than Suspension; Appeal from SMEO Sanctions. 
   The standard of proof under these procedures is preponderance of evidence.  If, after completing the investigation and consulting with the dean of students, the SMEO determines that it is more likely than not that the accused student violated sexual misconduct rules and chooses not to pursue a university suspension, a sanction or sanctions shall be imposed.  With the exception of university suspension, the SMEO has the authority to impose upon the accused student any one or a combination of the disciplinary sanctions listed below in sub-section 8 if the SMEO finds the accused student guilty of sexual misconduct following the conclusion of the investigation.  For example, the SMEO may place the accused student on disciplinary probation, impose a housing eviction, order restitution, require counseling, prohibit access to a building, and/or impose a no-contact order.  
   
   The findings of fact and sanctions shall be summarized in a letter to the accused student.  The finding letter shall also specify the permanent non-suspension sanctions imposed (if any) by the SMEO as a result of the investigation.  The SMEO shall inform the complaining party in writing of the outcome of the investigation as soon as possible, to the extent permitted by federal laws governing confidential student record information.  Upon request, the complaining party and the accused student shall be given access, as provided by education record laws, to the documents and other evidence compiled by the SMEO during the investigation.
   
   The SMEO’s letters to the complaining party and to the accused student shall each reference the Judicial Procedures for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct and set a deadline for appealing the SMEO’s decision to the dean of students.  Both the complaining party and the accused student have the opportunity to appeal the SMEO’s decision.  If the appeal deadline passes without a request for review, the sanctions will become effective and the complaint will be considered resolved.  
   
   An appeal must be filed in writing with the dean of students with supporting materials (if desired) in the dean's office by the deadline established by the SMEO.  The accused student’s petition for appeal should specify the basis for appeal by choosing one or more grounds from the following list:  (1) the SMEO’s decision to find the accused student guilty was unsupported by substantial evidence when the information compiled by the SMEO is viewed as a whole; (2) with respect to issues disputed during the investigation, the decision was, as a whole, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion; (3) the sanction imposed by the SMEO was unreasonably harsh when the nature of the violation and the disciplinary record of the accused student are considered; (4) the procedures were not properly followed; or (5) new evidence, not reasonably available at the time of the hearing, is of sufficient importance to warrant reconsideration by the SMEO.  Sanctions imposed by the SMEO shall ordinarily remain in effect while the dean considers the outcome of the appeal.
   
   The complaining party’s petition for appeal should specify the basis for appeal by choosing one or more grounds from the following list:  (1) the SMEO’s decision was unsupported by substantial evidence when the information compiled by the SMEO is viewed as a whole; (2) with respect to issues disputed at the hearing, the decision was, as a whole, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion; (3) the sanction imposed by the SMEO was unreasonably lenient when the nature of the violation is considered; (4) the procedures were not properly followed; or (5) new evidence, not reasonably available at the time of the hearing, is of sufficient importance to warrant reconsideration by the SMEO.  
   
   On appeal, the dean may determine to affirm the SMEO’s decision after reviewing the information compiled by the SMEO during the investigation.  Alternatively, the dean may determine to reverse or modify the outcome, or grant other appropriate relief, or remand the complaint to the SMEO with instructions to investigate the complaint further.  If the dean believes a university suspension may be warranted, the dean may determine to refer the complaint to a hearing adjudicator for a formal hearing.  
   
   The dean’s decision on appeal will be transmitted in writing to the SMEO, to the party that filed the appeal, and to other appropriate University officials within 20 calendar days following receipt of the petition.  It is the responsibility of the dean to notify the party that did not file the appeal (the complaining party or the accused student) of the outcome of the appeal filed by the accused student or the complaining party.  
5. Dismissal of Complaint and Appeal from Dismissal. 
   If, after completing the investigation, the SMEO determines that the preponderance of evidence does not show that the accused student violated a sexual misconduct rule, the SMEO shall dismiss the sexual misconduct complaint.  If the SMEO concludes to dismiss the sexual misconduct allegations but determines that the accused student did violate other (non-sexual misconduct) rules, the SMEO shall refer the matter to the dean of students for further review and possible sanctions imposed for the Code of Student Life violations. 
   
   The findings of fact shall be summarized in a letter to the accused student with a note explaining that the complaining party has the opportunity to appeal the dismissal.  The SMEO shall inform the complaining party in writing of the outcome of the investigation as soon as possible, to the extent permitted by federal laws governing confidential student record information.  The SMEO’s letter to the complaining party shall reference the Judicial Procedures for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct and set a deadline for appealing the SMEO’s decision to the dean of students.  If the appeal deadline passes without a request for review, the decision to dismiss will become final.  In this event, the SMEO shall inform the accused student and the complaining party that the complaint is considered resolved.  
   
   The complaining party’s appeal must be filed in writing with the dean of students with supporting materials (if desired) in the dean's office by the deadline established by the SMEO.  The petition for appeal should specify the basis for appeal by choosing one or more grounds from the following list:  (1) the SMEO’s decision to find the accused student not guilty of violating a conduct regulation was unsupported by substantial evidence when the information compiled by the SMEO is viewed as a whole; (2) with respect to issues disputed during the investigation, the decision to find the student not guilty was, as a whole, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion; (3) the procedures were not properly followed; or (4) new evidence, not reasonably available at the time of the hearing, is of sufficient importance to warrant reconsideration by the SMEO. 
   
   On appeal, the dean may determine to affirm the SMEO’s decision after reviewing the information compiled by the SMEO during the investigation.  Alternatively, the dean may determine to reverse or modify the outcome, or grant other appropriate relief, or remand the complaint to the SMEO with instructions to investigate the complaint further.  If the dean believes a university suspension may be warranted, the dean may determine to refer the complaint to a hearing adjudicator for a formal hearing.  
   
   The dean’s decision in response to the complaining party’s appeal of the dismissal will be transmitted in writing to the SMEO, to the complaining party, to the accused student, and to other appropriate University officials within 20 calendar days following receipt of the petition. 
6. Formal Hearing Charge Procedure in Suspension Cases.  
   In those cases where the Sexual Misconduct Enforcement Officer (SMEO) determines that a university suspension is warranted if the accused student is guilty of violating sexual misconduct rules, the dean of students shall assign a Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator to the case and set a preliminary hearing date.  Another Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator will be designated to replace the Adjudicator initially appointed by the dean if either the accused student or the complaining party can adequately demonstrate why the appointed Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator should not hear the case.  A substantial conflict of interest or a demonstrated bias may be grounds for assigning another Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator.  Such an objection must be made in writing to the dean of students, with a copy to the assigned Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator and to the SMEO, at least 2 University business days before the hearing is scheduled to begin.
   
   The dean of students shall determine which administrator will act as the charging officer.  The charging officer’s role is to represent the University at the formal hearing, coordinate the presentation of evidence against the accused student, and urge the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator to find the accused student responsible for alleged rule violations.  The SMEO may or may not be the administrator assigned the role of charging officer. 
   
   If the accused student elects to withdraw his or her registration from the University voluntarily prior to the hearing, the dean of students may proceed to the hearing stage notwithstanding the withdrawal unless the student agrees to an indefinite suspension.  A restriction shall be placed on the registration of a withdrawn student and the student’s record shall indicate that he/she withdrew after the disciplinary complaint was filed.  Later, following an interval of one year or longer, the student may petition the dean of students for reinstatement. 

   6a. The Notice of Hearing 
   The charging officer shall issue the Notice of Hearing letter to the accused student.  Notice of Hearing will be sent by U.S. mail, campus mail (for on-campus residents), or electronic mail, or will be served personally at least 7 University business days before the hearing.  The Notice of Hearing to the accused student shall (1) state the time and place of the formal hearing, (2) identify the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator assigned to the case, (3) identify the charging officer by name, (4) summarize the alleged actions or behavior, (5) set out the rule or rules which have been allegedly violated, (6) list the names of any witnesses intended to be called by the charging officer, (7) advise the accused student of his or her rights and of the hearing procedure, (8) indicate what measures will be taken at the hearing to physically separate the complaining party and any witnesses from the accused student, (9) attach the sanction document indicating the sanction(s) to be imposed by the dean of students if the student is found guilty, and (10) indicate what, if any, interim sanctions are in effect before the hearing.  The accused student will receive notification of names of any additional witnesses intended to be called by the charging officer at least 2 University business days prior to the hearing.
   
   The charging officer shall issue the Notice of Hearing letter to the complaining party.  Notice of Hearing will be sent by U.S. mail, campus mail (for on-campus residents), or electronic mail, or will be served personally at least 7 University business days before the hearing.  The Notice of Hearing to the complaining party shall (1) state the time and place of the formal hearing, (2) identify the name of the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator assigned to the case, (3) identify the charging officer by name, (4) summarize the alleged actions or behavior, (5) set out the rule or rules which have been allegedly violated, (6) list the names of any witnesses (including the complainant) intended to be called by the charging officer, (7) advise the complaining party’s rights at the hearing and the hearing procedure, (8) indicate what measures will be taken at the hearing to physically separate the complaining party from the accused student, (9) outline the sanction(s) to be imposed by the dean of students if the student is found guilty, and (10) indicate what, if any, interim sanctions are in effect before the hearing.  The letter shall invite the complaining party to submit a victim impact statement or update a previously submitted victim impact statement for consideration at the hearing.  The letter shall also invite the complaining party to identify any additional witnesses with information about the incident who the charging officer should consider calling to testify at the hearing.  
   
   6b. Consolidated Hearings 
   The dean of students may elect to resolve two or more complaints against one student at a single hearing.  In addition, the dean of students may elect to resolve a complaint against two or more students at separate hearings or at a single hearing in the event that the complaints arose out of the same transaction or occurrence.  Any challenge about complaint consolidation or separation will be determined by the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator.  To challenge a decision to separate or consolidate a complaint, the student accused must notify the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator of the ground(s) for the challenge in writing at least 2 University business days before the hearing is scheduled to take place.

   6c. Postponing the Hearing 
   If any party (the student accused of sexual misconduct, the complaining party, or the charging officer) cannot appear at the time specified, he or she must contact the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator or the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator at least 2 University business days before the hearing is scheduled to begin to arrange a different time for the hearing.  Unless a timely notice is filed and approved by the adjudicator, the hearing will proceed as scheduled. 
   
   6d.  Consequences of Non-attendance at the Hearing  
   If the student accused of sexual misconduct does not appear at the hearing and did not contact the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator or the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator prior to the hearing to indicate that he or she could not attend the hearing, the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator is authorized to make a decision on the merits of the charge based upon the evidence presented at the hearing. 
   
   If the complaining party does not appear at the hearing and did not contact the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator or the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator prior to the hearing to indicate that he or she could not attend the hearing, the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator is authorized to make a decision on the merits of the charge based upon the evidence presented at the hearing. 
   
   6e.  Rights at the Formal Hearing 
   The student accused of sexual misconduct is granted by these procedures the following rights at a formal hearing: (1) to present his or her side of the story; (2) to present witnesses and evidence on his or her behalf; (3) to hear witnesses testify (if witnesses appear in person to testify); (4) to review and comment on any documents or other evidence submitted as evidence at the hearing; (5) to be represented by an attorney or other adviser at the student's expense (if any expense is entailed), and (6) to submit questions for witnesses as long as the questions are relevant, material, and not unduly repetitive.  The process for questioning witnesses on cross-examination is set forth below.    
   
   The complaining party has the following rights at a formal hearing; (1) to present his or her side of the story; (2) to be accompanied by a person who may advise him or her of the hearing process; (3) to be present in the hearing room throughout the hearing (with no restriction on being recalled to testify); and (4) to be informed as soon as possible of the outcome of the hearing as permitted under federal laws governing confidential student record information.  Where permitted by federal law, the complainant shall have the opportunity to review documents and other evidence which is relevant to the issues raised by the complaining party and which is presented by the charging officer as evidence and made available to the accused student. 
   
   6f. Pre-Hearing Preparation
   Prior to the formal hearing, the student accused of sexual misconduct has a right to examine his or her disciplinary file in the Office of the Dean of Students.  The accused student also has a right to know, upon request, which written documents or other physical evidence in the disciplinary file the University representative plans to present at the hearing.  To arrange an appointment to examine the disciplinary file or learn what documents and other evidence will be presented at the hearing, the student should contact the Office of the Dean of Students at least 2 University business days before the hearing is scheduled to take place and arrange a meeting with the keeper of the record. 
   
   6g.  Rules of Hearing Adjudication
   The Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator (hereinafter “adjudicator”) shall preside at the hearing.  At the start of the hearing, the adjudicator shall (1) inform the accused student of the charge, the hearing procedures, the sanctions to be imposed if found guilty, and his or her rights and (2) answer any questions the accused student or the complaining party has on these matters.  The adjudicator shall hear and receive evidence to determine whether a violation of the sexual misconduct rules occurred.  
   
   The hearing shall be recorded.  During the evidence presentation, the adjudicator may exclude irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitive evidence.  Objections to evidentiary offers may be made and shall be noted in the record.  In those cases where a student is accused of sexual assault, the adjudicator shall review in advance of the proceeding the state law which excludes information about the victim’s past sexual history in a criminal case (Iowa Ct. R. 5.412).  The adjudicator shall ensure that no party to the case will be subject to questions which would be excluded in criminal court. 
   
   The adjudicator shall control the hearing process and maintain a level of decorum appropriate for a quasi-judicial proceeding at an educational institution.  In the event the hearing is disrupted, the adjudicator may insist that one or more individuals leave the hearing room if such a measure is necessary to preserve decorum. 
   
   6h.  Privacy and Partitions
   The hearing shall be closed to the public.  Where appropriate, and to prevent the two parties from viewing each other, the dean of students shall direct that partitions or other physical barriers be installed in the hearing room between the complaining party and the accused student.  Other witnesses do not ordinarily sit behind a partition, although the dean may elect to place one or more witnesses behind the partitions in addition to the complaining party.  If necessary to protect the interests of either the complaining party or the accused student, the adjudicator may call a recess.  If the adjudicator believes additional action is necessary to preserve decorum, a witness (including the complaining party) may be permitted to testify via audio line or video line from another room.  
   
   6i.  Testimony and Cross-examination
   After informing the accused student of the hearing procedures, the adjudicator shall ask the student to admit or deny the charges.  If the accused student denies any of the charges, the charging officer shall offer evidence, which may include written testimony and/or witnesses, in support of the charge.  Ordinarily, each witness (with the exception of the complaining party) will remain outside of the hearing room until called to testify.  Once seated, every witness (including the complaining party and the accused student) will be requested to respond truthfully to the questions posed.  
   
   During cross-examination, questions must be submitted in writing to the adjudicator, who will evaluate the questions.  As long as a submitted question is proper, the adjudicator may read the question verbatim.  A proposed question may be modified by the adjudicator in order to ensure the clarity of the subject addressed by the question. 
   
   After the charging officer has presented his or her case, the student accused of sexual misconduct may present his or her case and may offer evidence, which may include written testimony and witnesses, in his or her behalf.  The accused student’s witnesses shall be subject to questions by the charging officer under the same procedure described above.  On cross-examination, the charging officer shall submit questions in writing to the adjudicator, who will evaluate the questions.  As long as the charging officer’s question is proper, the adjudicator may read the question verbatim or modify the question in order to ensure its clarity.  
   
   6j.  Burden of Proof
   The charging officer bears the burden of showing by a preponderance of evidence that a sexual misconduct rule was violated.  A finding by the adjudicator shall be based upon the kind of evidence on which reasonably prudent persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of their serious affairs.  
   
   6k.  The Adjudicator’s Decision
   The adjudicator’s decision on the charges of sexual misconduct shall be issued in writing within 10 University business days after the hearing.  Any Code of Student Life rules (e.g., anti-noise or non-compliance rules) allegedly violated by the accused student also will be addressed in the decision.  
   
   Notification of Decision shall be sent to the accused student by certified mail or campus mail, to the charging officer, the dean of students, and to other appropriate University officers.  It is the responsibility of the dean of students to notify the complaining party in writing of the outcome of the hearing in a timely manner consistent with federal and state privacy laws.  The dean of student’s letter to the complaining party shall include a statement explaining the appeal procedure as set forth below.  Upon request, the complaining party and the accused student shall be given access, as provided by education record laws, to the record of the hearing.  
   
   If the accused student is found to have violated a sexual misconduct rule and/or the Code of Student Life, the adjudicator shall attach to the Notification of Decision a copy of the sanction document previously enclosed in the Notice of Hearing letter.  The adjudicator’s Notification of Decision letter shall also include a statement of the appeal procedure as set forth below. 

   The dean of students, in those cases where the accused student is found guilty, shall implement the sanction(s) specified in the sanction document that was attached to the Notification of Hearing.  The Adjudicator’s decision along with the sanction letter will be placed in the accused student’s disciplinary file in the Office of the Dean of Students.  The Office of the Dean of Students will determine the length of time a disciplinary record is to remain on file. 

7. Post-Hearing Appeals. 

   a.  Appeal by the Accused  All appeals by the student accused of sexual misconduct must be filed with the Office of the Provost (hereinafter "provost") with supporting materials (if desired) in the provost's office within 10 University business days following the receipt of the written notification of the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator's decision.  The student's written petition for appeal should specify the grounds for appeal from the list of five grounds enumerated below.  The provost shall designate an appropriate individual to review the record of the hearing and the past disciplinary records of the charged person.  Ordinarily, no new evidence will be received with respect to the findings of fact and the interpretation and application of the conduct regulations. 
   
   During the appeal, sanctions imposed by the dean of students shall remain in effect.  A student suspended or expelled may request, from the dean of students, permission to attend classes until the provost's designee has made a decision on appeal.
   
   The provost's designee may recommend to the provost that the decision be affirmed.  Alternatively, the provost's designee may recommend the decision be reversed, modified, or other appropriate relief be granted, or the complaint remanded to the adjudicator with instructions to reconsider the decision, if (1) the finding of guilt was unsupported by substantial evidence in the record made before the adjudicator when the record is viewed as a whole; (2) with respect to issues disputed at the hearing, the decision was, as a whole, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion; (3) the sanction imposed for the violation was unreasonably harsh or inappropriate when the nature of the violation and the disciplinary record of the charged person are considered; (4) the procedures were not properly followed; or (5) new evidence, not reasonably available at the time of the hearing, is of sufficient importance to warrant reconsideration by the adjudicator.  The student's written petition for appeal should specify one or more of these grounds for appeal.
   
   The decision on appeal and the reasons therefore will be transmitted to the student charged, the charging officer, the dean of students, and other appropriate University officials within 30 calendar days of the receipt of the Notice of Appeal.  It is the responsibility of the dean of students to notify the complaining party of the outcome of the appeal.  The decision of the adjudicator and the final decision on appeal, as well as the notices and other related documents, will be kept in the student's disciplinary file in the Office of the Dean of Students.

   7b.  Appeal by the Charging Officer or by the Complaining Party  
   The charging officer or the complaining party, or both the charging officer and the complaining party, may appeal the decision of the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator (hereinafter “adjudicator”) to the provost.  All appeals must be filed with the Office of the Provost (hereinafter "provost") with supporting materials (if desired) in the provost's office within 10 University business days following the receipt of the written notification of the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator's decision.  The petition for appeal should specify the grounds for appeal from the list of five grounds enumerated below.  The provost shall designate an appropriate individual to review the record of the hearing and the past disciplinary records of the charged person.  Ordinarily, no new evidence will be received with respect to the findings of fact and the interpretation and application of the conduct regulations.

   The provost's designee may recommend to the provost that the decision be affirmed.  Alternatively, the provost's designee may recommend the decision be reversed, modified, or other appropriate relief be granted, or the complaint remanded to the adjudicator with instructions to reconsider the decision, if (1) the decision was unsupported by substantial evidence in the record made before the adjudicator when the record is viewed as a whole; (2) with respect to issues disputed at the hearing, the decision was, as a whole, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion; (3) the sanction imposed by the dean was unreasonably lenient when the nature of the violation is considered; (4) the procedures were not properly followed; or (5) new evidence, not reasonably available at the time of the hearing, is of sufficient importance to warrant reconsideration by the adjudicator.  The petition for appeal should specify one or more of these grounds for appeal.

   On appeal, the adjudicator’s interpretation and application of the student sexual misconduct rules and the Judicial Procedure for Allegations of Sexual Misconduct may be challenged.  But neither the charging officer nor the complaining party may appeal from the adjudicator's conclusions as to the facts of the case except to argue they are not supported by substantial evidence.
   
   The decision on appeal and the reasons therefore will be transmitted to the dean of students, the student charged, and other appropriate University officials within 30 calendar days of the receipt of the petition, and will be kept in the student's disciplinary file in the Office of the Dean of Students.  In those cases where the complaining party initiates the appeal, the decision on appeal will be directed to the complaining party with copies to the student charged, the dean of students, and other appropriate University officials.  If the complaining party did not initiate the appeal, it is the responsibility of the dean of students to notify the complaining party of the outcome of the appeal.

8. Sanctions. 

   When the SMEO finds the accused student in violation of university rules without a formal hearing, all of the sanctions below may be imposed except for University suspension or expulsion.  When a sexual misconduct complaint is referred to the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator for a formal hearing, the dean of students has the authority to impose any one or a combination of the following disciplinary sanctions if the student is found guilty by the Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator.  The sanctions imposed will be those specified by the dean of students in the Notice of Hearing letter.  The following are to serve as guidelines rather than as a definitive list of sanctions.

    

   1. Disciplinary Warning:  This is a strong, written warning that if there is a repetition of the same action or any other action in violation of the Rules and Regulations of the Code of Student Life and/or the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy, the student can expect additional disciplinary action.  A record of the disciplinary action is kept on file.
   2. Disciplinary Probation:  When on disciplinary probation a student is not considered to be in good standing with respect to the non-academic disciplinary system and any further violations may lead to suspension or expulsion from the University.
   3. Restitution and Fines:  A student may be assessed reasonable expenses related to the misconduct.  This may include, but is not limited to, the repair/replacement cost for any damage he or she causes to property or medical or counseling expenses incurred by the victim.  If a student violates a residence hall policy that calls for the imposition of a fine, a fine will be assessed consistent with residence hall practice.
   4. Educational Sanction:  A student may be required to provide a specific service or participate in a specific program, receive specific instruction, or complete a research assignment.  The student is responsible for related expenses, including expenses for education, counseling, or treatment, if any expense is entailed.
   5. Exclusion from University Facilities or Activities:  A student may be prohibited from accessing University computer equipment or internet connections, attending a class, undertaking University employment, entering a building (a residence hall or academic building, e.g.), participating in an extra-curricular activity sponsored by the University, representing the University in an official capacity, or using other services provided by the University.  Such exclusion may be for a definite or indefinite period of time.
   6. Disciplinary Suspension:  A student may be involuntarily separated from the University for a stated period of time after which readmission is possible.  A student with one or more violations may be suspended from the University for an indefinite period of time.  A student suspended indefinitely may petition to the dean of students for reinstatement.
   7. Expulsion: When a student has a record of serious violations, he or she may be dismissed from the University permanently.
   8. Residence Halls Suspension:  A student may be involuntarily separated from the residence halls or transferred to a different hall or floor.  Unless specifically permitted to do so by the dean of students, a student suspended from the residence halls is ineligible to use residence hall services, including board plans, and may not enter the residence halls.  For purposes of progressive discipline, a student suspended from the Residence Halls may be suspended or expelled from the University if he or she is found to have violated the Code of Student Life subsequent to the housing suspension.
   9. No-Contact Order:  A student may be prohibited from intentionally contacting a student, employee, or visitor to campus in any manner at any time. Such prohibition may be in effect for a specific or an indefinite period of time.

    

   Ordinarily, a student found guilty of sexual assault is suspended or expelled from the University even if there are no prior sanctions on the student's record.  A pattern of behavior (such as stalking) which places another person in reasonable fear of his/her safety may also result in a suspension or expulsion. 

9. Interim Suspension and Other Measures or Restrictions. 

   Pending the outcome of a disciplinary proceeding, a student accused of sexual misconduct may be suspended from the University or have privileges revoked if, in the judgment of the dean of students or the Sexual Misconduct Enforcement Officer (SMEO), acting on behalf of the dean, the student's continued presence or use of privileges at the University pending the outcome of the proceeding is likely to cause harm to faculty, staff, other students, other specified persons or groups, or University property.  The accused student will be directed not to contact the complaining party, a restriction which is usually lifted during the hearing if both parties attend the hearing.  
   
   The dean of students or SMEO will base an interim sanction judgment on evidence gathered in the initial stage of an investigation of the alleged conduct.  Ordinarily, the dean of students or the dean's designee will converse with the student when interim suspension is considered.  A student suspended under this section may seek review of that decision by requesting the dean of students to reconsider the decision within 5 University business days after the student has received Notice of Suspension.

10. Criminal Charges. 

    Students who face criminal charges of sexual misconduct may be subject to University disciplinary sanctions if the conduct which gave rise to the criminal charges also violates the sexual misconduct rules and/or the Code of Student Life.  The dean of students may elect to delay the resolution of a sexual misconduct complaint if concurrent criminal charges are pending.  If the dean of students elects to delay, the sexual misconduct complaint will be resolved administratively after the criminal charges are resolved in court unless the accused student is suspended by the dean on an interim basis and he/she requests a formal hearing to resolve the merits of the administrative complaint prior to the resolution of the criminal charge.
    
    University regulations and procedures are distinct from criminal statutes and procedures.  The outcome in a criminal or civil proceeding is not dispositive of the question of whether the sexual misconduct rules and/or Code of Student Life rules were violated in all cases.  A student charged with criminal misconduct will be considered guilty of violating University conduct regulations and therefore subject to disciplinary sanctions if convicted in criminal court of conduct prohibited under the sexual misconduct rules and/or the Code of Student Life.  For purposes of these procedures, a conviction includes a guilty plea, jury verdict, judicial decision, or deferred judgment.  Due to the less stringent standard of proof under these judicial procedures, a student charged but not convicted of a crime is still subject to University disciplinary action if found guilty by a Sexual Misconduct Enforcement Officer (SMEO) or a Sexual Misconduct Adjudicator.