AboutUST

Disciplinary Rights and Procedures - Non Academic

The Dean of Students is responsible for the enforcement of the Code of Conduct of the University of St. Thomas (University). The Dean has wide latitude and discretion within the University judicial system to take action deemed appropriate for any given case. Students charged with violating the University's Code of Conduct will be afforded a hearing in accordance with the following procedures.

(These procedures exclude those outlined in the Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policies, which appear elsewhere in the online policy book.)
(These procedures exclude study-abroad programs: see "Disciplinary Rights and Responsibilities for Study-Abroad Programs" in the online Student Policy Book.)

Fundamental Fairness
Notice and the Opportunity to be Heard

The goal of the University Judicial System is the same as that of the University; it is dedicated to the moral and intellectual development of our students. The judicial system is part of a private institution of higher education. It is not the civil or criminal justice system. The University System of Discipline is designed to assure fundamental fairness - that every student will be given the opportunity to know of the Code of Conduct violation for which he or she has been charged, and the opportunity for those students to have their response to those charges heard.

Notice and Hearing: The basic requirements for due process within the University Judicial System are notice and hearing:

Students shall receive notice of their violations and the right to have those violations heard by an individual hearing officer or a hearing board. Notice, whenever possible, shall be in writing. This written notice may consist of email transmission through the University network and/or written correspondence through the campus mail. Personal contact or phone contact is acceptable provided that it is documented.
A student charged with a violation of the University Code of Conduct shall be afforded the opportunity to review the written report on which the charges against them are based with a University judicial officer. A University judicial officer shall document any meeting with a student charged with a code violation. Documentation of such a meeting to review alleged code violations shall be considered adequate evidence that a student has received notice of the violations against them.

Hearings for the vast majority of student conduct violations shall be of an informal nature, and will, for all intents and purposes, resemble an interview. Such meetings with judicial officers are meant to discuss the student's role and responsibility for the Code of Conduct violation alleged, and appropriate sanctions should the student be found responsible for the conduct violation(s) alleged. Such interviews are not tape-recorded and any decision may be appealed to a University Hearing Board. A sanction letter will be issued from any hearing where a student has been found responsible for a University code violation.

Standard of Proof: A preponderance of the evidence

The standard of proof for holding a student responsible for the code violation(s) alleged is a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of evidence means, that upon weighing the evidence, a judicial officer or hearing board believes it is more likely than not that the student is responsible for the violation(s) alleged.

The judicial process is designed to be fundamentally fair. It is also designed to be flexible and efficient in order to achieve timely resolution to all allegations of misconduct. The structures, policies and procedures set forth below are intended to achieve these goals. The Dean of Students reserves the right to establish and make adjustment to any rule or guideline in a given case.

  1. University Judicial Authority

The First Level of Judicial Authority - Judicial Officers
In the majority of cases, a judicial officer will be the University official designated to review an allegation that a St. Thomas student has violated the Code of Conduct. Judicial officers will make inquiry into the merits of the allegations presented and may make a determination of responsibility and issue appropriate sanctions. A judicial officer may determine that an allegation has no merit and dismiss charges. A judicial officer may determine that the matter should be referred to a hearing board. All decisions made by a judicial officer are vested with the formal disciplinary authority of the University. All decisions made by a judicial officer may be appealed to a hearing board.

Judicial Officer - Definition:
The term "Judicial Officer" means a University official, who, on a case by case basis, is authorized by the Dean of Students Office, to investigate violations of University rules and policy, to make findings of fact, and to impose sanctions.

Coordinating Judicial Officer (CJO):
The Coordinating Judicial Officer for the University is the Assistant Dean for Student Life. The Coordinating Judicial Officer shall:

  • Determine the composition of hearing boards.
  • Determine upon referral from Public Safety and/or Campus Living, which cases may or should be referred to a hearing board for the initial hearing.
  • Serve as an advisor to hearing boards and work in conjunction with the chair.
  • Advise and serve as counselor, administrator and observer to the Discipline Committee.
  • Develop policies for the administration of the judicial program and procedural rules for the conduct of hearings that are consistent with provisions of The Online Student Policy Book.
  • Develop and institute appropriate training for judicial officers and other University personnel involved in the disciplinary process.
  • Act as an informational nexus to the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Campus Living and the University's Neighborhood Liaison's Office with regard to judicial matters and student violations of University policy and/or state law.
  • Review and oversee the University judicial process. The Dean of Students also authorizes the following personnel to act as judicial officers in their capacity as University officials responsible for enforcement and adjudication of violations of the University  Code of Conduct:
    • Campus Living Staff; specifically including hall directors and area directors.
    • University Hearing Board Chairpersons.
    • Other University personnel as deemed necessary and appropriate to the disciplinary process.

Judicial Officer - Role & Duties:

A judicial officer is a University official who is designated to have original jurisdiction in most matters involving student conduct violations. A judicial officer is vested with broad and flexible authority to gather information and is empowered to make decisions regarding the disposition of alleged student code violations.

Hearings before judicial officers are of an informal nature, and are intended to achieve a quick and fair resolution to the issue of responsibility and subsequent sanctions if appropriate. Hearings with judicial officers most resemble an interview. They are documented but are not audio recorded unless requested by the student or the officer. All decisions rendered by judicial officers carry the full weight and authority of the University. Decisions are documented and placed in the student's file.

All judicial officers are vested by the university with the power and authority to:

  • Follow up on the initial investigation into incidents involving violation(s) of university policy.
  • Make findings of fact and determinations of responsibility for violation(s) of university policy.
  • Issue sanctions upon completion of an investigation and a finding that a student is responsible for a violation of the Code of conduct.
  • Refer any student conduct matter to a hearing board through the Coordinating Judicial Officer.

All decisions made by a judicial officer may be appealed to a University Hearing Board. Forms for appeal of a decision by a judicial officer can be found in the Dean of Students Office or the Campus Living Office, and are discussed in detail in the section on appeals.

Upon the receipt of written charges of misconduct and after review of the written charges, the CJO, in consultation with the lead judicial officer for Campus Living, will make a determination as to whether the hearing for any given case will be before a judicial officer or a hearing board. Judicial officers will adjudicate the majority of cases. In cases where the gravity or complexity of a given situation require it, a hearing board will be given original jurisdiction to hear the matter.

Except in cases of conflict of interest or cases where placing a particular judicial officer on a particular board would be manifestly unfair or prejudicial, judicial officers are authorized to act as full voting members of hearing boards to which they are appointed.

The Second Level of Judicial Authority - University Hearing Boards

University Hearing Boards serve a dual purpose. In some cases, a hearing board will act as an appeals board to review decisions made by a judicial officer. In general, when the board hears an appeal, it will not review the facts of the case but only the decision of the judicial officer based on the standards of appeal to a hearing board as set forth below.
In some cases, a University Hearing Board may be convened to act as a "trial court" to make determination of facts, assign responsibility and issue sanctions. The board will act in this manner only in select cases involving conduct where the violations alleged give rise to potentially severe consequences. The coordinating judicial officer in conjunction with other designees of the Dean of Students shall make this determination.

University Hearing Boards - Role and Duties

The University Hearing Board, acting as a designee of the Dean of Students, shall have the authority to hear cases of alleged misconduct and impose appropriate sanctions subject to review and approval of the Dean of Students. Boards will consist of 3-5 members made up of faculty, staff and students including a chairperson.

Chairpersons

There will be a pool of trained chairpersons. The chairperson will be responsible for conducting the hearing, the recording and maintenance of an audiotape of the hearing, and the issuance of the decision letter to the accused student. The chairperson will participate in the deliberation of the board and work to bring the board to a consensus. If a vote is necessary, the chair will only vote in the case of a tie.

Appointments/Selection of University Hearing Board Members

Terms of University hearing board members typically begin the first week of the fall semester, and continue for one year with the possibility of reappointment. Appointments will include summer months to allow the University Hearing Boards to be used throughout the year. However, due to the practical realities of the academic calendar, the CJO will have greater flexibility in the composition of hearing boards during J-Term, the summer months and the first weeks of the new academic year.

Student board members will be chosen by a selection process overseen by the Dean of Students with members approved by the All College Council (ACC) elections and credentials committee. Students must have a minimum of a 2.25 GPA and not be on academic or disciplinary probation. Executive board members of the All College Council, the Campus Living staff, or any voting member of the ACC general council will not be eligible for selection to the University Hearing Board.

In recognition of the practical need to have an adequate pool of student hearing board members, the Dean of Students may select student hearing board members outside of the ACC provided that these students meet the same criteria as outlined above and have received appropriate training through the Dean's office.

Staff and faculty hearing board members will be recruited and trained by the Dean of Students Office. University Hearing Boards will have full decision-making authority with regard to all non-academic disciplinary violations and sanctions, subject to review and approval of the Dean of Students.

The Third Level of Judicial Authority - The Discipline Committee


The University Discipline Committee is the highest level of appeal in the University Judicial Process. Appeals to the Discipline Committee are not automatic. All appeals to the Discipline Committee will be reviewed by the Dean of Students to assure that there are legitimate grounds for an appeal. If, in the sole discretion of the Dean of Students, the appeal is allowed to go forward, the determination by the Discipline Committee is final. There are no further judicial appeals from the Discipline Committee.

The chairperson and faculty chosen to serve on the Discipline Committee are selected in accordance with the Faculty Organization Plan. It is a hearing body that is integrally related to the Office of the Dean of Students, but is autonomous. The CJO is the liaison between the Dean's office and the committee.

Executive Authority

The Vice President for Student Affairs is the University officer designated by and vested with the executive power and authority of the University to intervene in any matter involving student conduct. The Dean of Students is also vested with executive authority to intervene in any matter involving student conduct. The Dean's authority is subject only to that of the Vice President for Student Affairs. The Dean reserves the right to establish and make adjustment to any rule or guideline in a given case.

Notice: If a student’s behavior poses a clear and specific danger to themselves and/or other members of the University community, the student may be placed on interim suspension pending processing through the University disciplinary system or other policies deemed appropriate and reasonable under the circumstances.

Notice: At the discretion of the Vice President for Student Affairs and the Dean of Students, students who have been charged with a criminal felony will be subject to immediate placement on interim suspension pending the outcome of the criminal process and/or the judicial process of the University.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Code of Conduct

  2. Actions which violate the human rights of any student or member of the university community; use or threatened use of physical force or violence to restrict the freedom of action or movement of another, to endanger the physical health, psychological health or safety of any person, including oneself; or behavior or language disrespectful of university employees or students.
  3. Conduct, on or off campus, that is detrimental to the good of the university or which discredits the university. Such conduct off campus includes, but is not limited to hosting house parties and/or student behaviors that are disruptive to the community and violate laws. Conduct on campus includes, but is not limited to, behavior disruptive to a residence hall community as detailed in the Resident Student Handbook; Conduct detrimental to the university also includes knowingly assenting to or condoning violation of university policies or state, federal or local laws by others.
  4. Misrepresentation and/or academic dishonesty such as: cheating and plagiarism; knowingly furnishing false information or identification; and fraud, forgery, alteration or unauthorized use of university documents, records, identification or property. *
  5. Unauthorized taking or possession of university property, services or the property or services of others.
  6. Intentional damage to, or destruction of, university property, or the property of others on university premises. This includes damage as a result of gross negligence (including vandalism or tampering with fire alarms or extinguishers.)
  7. Underage use or possession of alcohol, distribution of alcohol to underage persons, excessive consumption of alcohol, public intoxication, possession of alcoholic beverages or beverage containers on University property contrary to law or university regulations, or knowingly assenting to or condoning violation of university alcohol policies by others.
  8. Possession, use, or trafficking of illegal drugs and/or drug paraphernalia.
  9. The possession or use of explosives, fireworks, firearms, knives, ammunition, other dangerous weapons or materials on university property.
  10. Gambling on university premises.
  11. Failure to comply with the directives of University officials and their authorized agents acting in the performance of their duties; failure to appear before the Dean of Students (or designee**) or the Committee on Discipline when properly notified to do so as either a witness or a student charged in a discipline case or as a witness; disruption or purposeful interference with faculty, administrators, security officers or staff in the performance of their duties.
  12. Students, when on campus, must be able to produce identification, usually a St. Thomas ID card, when requested to do so by any official representative of the University including Public Safety, resident hall staff, dining hall authorities, library personnel, et al.
  13. Violations of federal, state, city laws/ordinances: Should an act violate both university regulations and public law, the student is subject to dual jurisdiction.

Notice: Students are responsible for all activity that takes place in their residence hall rooms and are also responsible for the actions of their guests
* The appropriate academic dean or designee will adjudicate misrepresentation related to academic services. The Dean of Students or designee will hear misrepresentation related to nonacademic services.
** Designee may include individuals of the Dean of Students staff given the responsibility of adjudicating discipline cases or the University Hearing Board.
*** All decisions made by the designees of the Dean of Students are subject to review and approval by the Dean of Students.

For violations of the Code of Conduct concerning study-abroad situations, please see The Disciplinary Rights and Responsibilities for Study-Abroad Programs Academic and Non-Academic.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Charges
     

Violations of the Code of Conduct will normally be addressed according to the following sequence:

The first step in the judicial process is the submission of a written report of misconduct to a judicial officer. Upon review of the written report by a judicial officer, appropriate charges of misconduct will be issued. Any incident should be reported and submitted as soon as possible after the incident, preferably within three working days.
The written report on which the charges are based should include the following:

  1. The date, time and location of the incident;

  2. The name(s) of the individual(s) involved;

  3. Specific factual details of the incident.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Investigation

The judicial officer will review the report and charges alleged and, if necessary, make further investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged violation of University rules or policies. The judicial officer will meet with the student(s) involved to inform them of their rights and the nature of the charges against them. The judicial officer will also interview them to gather any further information regarding the incident. This meeting may be considered a hearing if no further investigation is necessary.

The judicial officer will also interview any other University students, staff or interested third parties necessary to make an accurate finding of fact and determination of responsibility.
The officer may at this time determine that:

  1. The information in the written report contains facts that rise to the level of a Code of Conduct violation and will be adjudicated by that officer.

  2. The information in the written report does not contain facts that rise to the level of a conduct violation and are therefore dismissed.

  3. This matter needs to be referred to the Coordinating Judicial Officer (CJO) for a hearing before a board.

  4. The matter needs further investigation.
    The judicial officer may, at any time during the course of this investigation, formally present the student with charges of student misconduct along with an Indication of Plea Form.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Notification of Charges


It is anticipated that in most cases involving a code violation, the student will be contacted by and directed to meet with the judicial officer reviewing the incident. During the initial meeting, the student will be informed of the specifics of the charges as described above and contained in the written incident report. In those cases, a formal charge letter is unnecessary provided the judicial officer properly documents his or her efforts to contact the student. Appearing at a hearing with a judicial officer to review charges contained in an incident report is evidence of satisfactory notice.

Either during or upon completion of the investigation, the judicial officer shall give the student formal notice of the charges contained in the Indication of Plea form. The student will also receive a Notice of Rights form. The Notice of Rights form indicates that the student has received notice of the code violations alleged and outlines their basic rights and refers them to the online Student Policy Book.

In cases where circumstances dictate and/or the student cannot be reached through the normal channels as described above, a formal and detailed charge letter will be delivered to the student by other means such as personal delivery or certified mail. Such a formal charge letter will outline with specificity the facts of the alleged violations and will direct the student(s) to appear before the judicial officer at an appointed date and time.

- Return to top of page  -

  1. Hearings Before a Judicial Officer and Hearing Boards

Hearings Before a Judicial Officer

Hearings with judicial officers, while carrying formal consequences, are of an informal nature. A hearing may be defined as any time a judicial officer is discussing the investigation or adjudication of a student conduct incident with a student who has been directed to meet with that judicial officer regarding that incident. One or more judicial officers may be present at a hearing.

At the hearing, the student will be given an Indication of Plea form and a Notice of Rights form. The student will read and sign the Notice of Rights form at the hearing. The Indication of Plea form will outline the student code violation(s) alleged and require the student to either assume or deny responsibility for those code violations. The student may choose to wait the allotted three working days to return the signed and completed Indication of Plea form. Failure to return the completed and signed Indication of Plea form will result in a determination of responsibility and sanctions will ensue. The student may also choose to further discuss the issues of responsibility and sanctions with the judicial officer to come to a resolution of the incident.

Hearings before a judicial officer are meant to be non-adversarial. They are designed to inform students of alleged code violations, and also to educate students and answer any questions about the University Judicial System and their rights under that system. The purpose of hearings before a judicial officer is a quick and fair resolution to the incident.
At the hearing, or after the student has completed and returned the Indication of Plea, the matter may take one of the following paths:

  1. The charges against the student are dismissed or the student is found not responsible and the incident is removed from their University record.
  2. The student takes responsibility for the code violation. If so, then the judicial officer will issue sanctions. They may issue the sanctions in that meeting or within the next five working days.
  3. The judicial officer makes a determination of responsibility with which the student disagrees. In this case the matter may be appealed in writing to the CJO within three working days (See section on Appeals).
  4. The student takes responsibility for the code violation but disagrees with the sanctions issued. In such cases the student may appeal the officer's decision to the CJO within the next three working days. (See section on Appeals).

In all the above cases except #1, the judicial officer will write an official closing letter indicating the status of the charges and the sanctions. This letter will be placed in the student's disciplinary file. In rare cases, circumstance, practicality and fairness may dictate that a disciplinary matter is to be held in a student's disciplinary file in an "open and unresolved status."

Hearings Before a University Hearing Board

Situations involving misconduct arise where circumstances create matters of a serious nature. Such matters require the authority and formality of a University Hearing Board. Examples of such situations are listed below:

  1. Cases involving violence.
  2. Cases involving the sale or distribution of illegal drugs.
  3. Cases involving personal injury or acts of extreme negligence.
  4. Incidents that may be concurrently adjudicated by criminal authorities.
  5. Situations involving students who have had multiple adjudicated violations.
  6. Cases that have been forwarded to a hearing board by the original investigating judicial officer through the CJO in the Dean of Students Office.

The above list is not meant to be exhaustive, but demonstrative of situations where a University Hearing Board will be convened to hear a case for the first time. In such cases it is empowered to hear the case and make final disposition with regard to responsibility and sanctions.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Issuance of Decision

Decisions made by a Judicial Officer

It is anticipated that in the vast majority of cases involving alleged student misconduct, the judicial officer and the student involved in the prohibited conduct will discuss the incident and subsequent sanctions if found responsible. Through the notification, investigation and informal hearing process, the student and the judicial officer will come to a mutual understanding about responsibility and subsequent sanctions. In all cases where a student has admitted to responsibility for a code violation, or has been found responsible by a preponderance of the evidence, a closing letter, a sanction letter or some other documentation based on the judicial officer's determination will be issued to the student and placed in their file. The judicial officer will issue a decision within five working days of the hearing/meeting.

Students who fail to return the Indication of Plea form, will be adjudicated as responsible for the code violations alleged. The judicial officer will issue a sanction within five days of the deadline set by the judicial officer for the return of the form.

If the student disagrees with any decision made by a judicial officer, they may file an appeal, in writing, to the CJO in the office of the Dean of Students within three working days. (See the section on Appeals)

Decisions made by a University Hearing Board

In cases heard by a University Hearing Board, decisions will be rendered by a majority vote of all voting members of the hearing board.

If, based on the preponderance of evidence, the hearing board is satisfied that the violation occurred as alleged, a proper response shall be considered. If a student is found responsible for the code violations alleged, the hearing board will then review the student's discipline file to consider prior violations of the Code of Conduct, and will take evidence of prior violations into consideration in determining an appropriate sanction.

The decision of the hearing board shall be put in writing as a sanction letter, and shall be signed by the board chair. The board chair and the CJO will meet with the student to present the decision of the board as documented in the sanction letter. At meeting, the student will be encouraged to discuss the board's reasoning with the board chair and the CJO.
In addition to receiving the board's decision, the student will be provided with information regarding appeals. The CJO will answer any questions regarding the appeals process, and the student will be offered the choice of either accepting to the board's determination and the proposed sanction or of requesting an appeal.

The results of any hearings cannot be reported to the general public and/or the media. Only the accused student and necessary administrative personnel/offices will be notified of decisions. In cases where a student has been a victim of violence, that victim will be notified of the board's decision but is prohibited from releasing that information to any third party.

(Due to the unique nature of a study abroad program, disciplinary decisions made by faculty or staff during study abroad programs are not subject to review by the Dean of Students. However, nothing precludes the Dean from taking further disciplinary action if circumstances warrant.)

- Return to top of page -

  1. Appeals

If the student disagrees with the determination of responsibility by either a judicial officer or a University Hearing Board, or the level of sanctions imposed, the student may appeal the decision. In all cases, appeals must be made in writing and must outline the grounds for appeal as described below. The appeal must be received in the Dean of Students Office within three working days of the decision.

Appeal of a judicial officer's determination is to a University Hearing Board. Appeal of a hearing board determination is to the Discipline Committee.

Grounds for Appeal of a Decision by a Judicial Officer or Hearing Board:

  1. That the decision was made contrary to existing University policy.
  2. That information used to reach a decision was incomplete and/or inaccurate.
  3. That circumstances beyond the control of the student kept the student from responding to the allegations in a timely manner.
  4. That there was substantial evidence that a violation of the appropriate disciplinary procedures occurred.
  5. That the decision of the judicial officer or hearing board was not based on a preponderance of the evidence.
  6. That the sanctions imposed are manifestly unfair and bear no rational relation to the conduct alleged, based on the incident at hand and the student's prior discipline record, if any.

University Hearing Board as an Appeals Board:
A University Hearing Board will act in the capacity of an appeals board when it is asked to review decisions made by judicial officers. Such appeals are made through the Dean's office, usually through the CJO. Students have the right to appeal any decision made by a judicial officer regarding violations and/or sanctions. The hearing board will rehear the case and may take any of the following actions:

  1. Affirm the original decision and sanction;
  2. Affirm the original decision and reduce or increase the original sanction;
  3. Reverse the original decision and drop all charges;
  4. Reverse the original decision and make a different determination of responsibility and sanctions.

In situations where a judicial officer's decision has been appealed, it will first be referred to the CJO. The CJO will meet with the student(s) to discuss the appeal. This can be thought of as one more chance to clarify questions and attempt to resolve any issues regarding the issue of responsibility and/or sanctions. If this is unsuccessful, the CJO will convene a University Hearing Board. Appeals of a decision made by a hearing board will be referred to the Discipline Committee.

Discipline Committee

The Discipline Committee will act in the capacity of an appeals board that will review decisions made by a University Hearing Board. The Discipline Committee is the highest level of judicial appeal.

The Discipline Committee is a standing committee of the University. While it is a separate and autonomous hearing body, it works in close concert with the Dean's office and the CJO. All appeals to the Discipline Committee will be reviewed and approved by the Dean of Students. Once an appeal is referred to the Discipline Committee, the Discipline Committee will consider the basis for appeal and may respond in the following ways:

  1. If the appeal is made for noncompliance with disciplinary procedures, the Discipline Committee will not rehear the case, but will consider evidence of a violation of procedures. Should such a violation of procedures be determined, a new hearing of the case will be ordered.
  2.  If the appeal is made for disagreement with the decision of the hearing body and/or the appropriateness/fairness of sanction(s) imposed, the Discipline Committee will review the entire case and may;
    1. Affirm the original decision and sanction;
    2. Affirm the original decision and reduce or increase the original sanction;
    3. Reverse the original decision and drop all charges;
    4. Reverse the original decision and order a new hearing by the Dean of Students, or their designees.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Sanctions

The scope of disciplinary penalties that may be imposed on a student found responsible for violating the Code of Conduct of the University of St. Thomas are as follows:

Expulsion: This action is the permanent removal of a student from the University community. Apart from civil or criminal sanctions, expulsion is the most severe penalty the University can employ.

Suspension: This action is the temporary removal of the student from the University community for a specific period of time. In no case shall the period of suspension be less than the balance of the semester during which the hearings take place. Suspension may be immediate or delayed to a future academic term.

Interim Suspension: Interim suspension is an executive decision made by the Dean of Students or the Dean's designee and may be appealed only to the Vice President for Student Affairs. Interim suspensions are reserved for rare and unusual cases where, in the Dean's sole discretions, circumstances dictate an immediate change in a student's status that denies a student access to the residence halls and/or the University pending a hearing on the incident for which the student has been placed on interim suspension.

Interim suspension may be imposed: a) In situations involving the safety and well-being of members of the University community or preservation of University property; b) to ensure the student's own physical or emotional safety and well-being; c) if the student poses a definite threat of disruption of normal operations of the University; d) contemptuous disregard for University authority; or e) because the severity of the offense alleged, will likely result in suspension or expulsion from a residence hall or the University.

In the event of a suspension or expulsion, the student would follow the normal withdrawal policy

Residence Hall Status:

Removal and Cancellation of Housing Contract: This action is not permanent, but is a strong statement that a student's conduct has been so detrimental to the residence hall community that their housing contract for that academic year has been canceled. A student whose contract has been canceled will be allowed to reapply for housing in the future, but will lose their priority to apply for such housing, as they are no longer a residential student. Unless otherwise stated, a student whose contract has been canceled may enter the residence halls as a guest, provided that student is not currently on conduct probation. A student on conduct probation who enters the residence halls after being removed is subject to suspension or permanent removal from the residence halls.

Suspension from University Residence Halls: Unless otherwise stated, a student who has been suspended from University housing is not allowed to enter a University residence hall for any reason during the period of their suspension. Violation of the terms of residence hall suspension may lead to expulsion from the residence halls and/or suspension or expulsion from the University. Students may reapply for University housing after the period of their suspension has expired. Students suspended from University housing will have their disciplinary files held indefinitely by the Dean of Students Office.

Expulsion From the Residence Halls: Students expelled from the residence halls will not be allowed to enter a University Residence Hall. Expulsion is a permanent sanction and will remain on file indefinitely. A student who enters a residence hall after expulsion faces suspension or expulsion from the University.

Conduct Probation: This action constitutes a specified time period during which a student must conduct him or herself in an exemplary manner. Any student found responsible for violations of University Code of Conduct while on conduct probation will normally be suspended or expelled, and/or evicted from the residence halls. A student on conduct probation cannot apply to or participate in the study abroad program. Conduct probation may also affect a student's eligibility to apply for some leadership positions on campus.

Formal Reprimand: This action constitutes an official written reprimand concerning violation of University policy. As a general rule, a student receiving a formal reprimand can expect that any future violation of the University Code of Conduct will result in a minimum sanction of conduct probation.

Written Warning: This action constitutes an official written warning placed in a student's disciplinary file. Written warnings will result in more severe consequences for any future misconduct as a result of such warning being placed in a student's file

Fines: The University recognizes that fines for violation of University Code of Conduct, particularly with regard to alcohol and illegal drug violations, are an appropriate sanction. Fines are standard consequences for violation of the laws of society at large and as such they model future consequences a student may encounter in the civil and criminal justice systems. Fines go back into the community and are used to provide for student programming.

Community Service: The University recognizes that community service for violation of University Code of Conduct, particularly for alcohol and illegal drug violations is an appropriate sanction. Community service is a standard consequence for violation of the laws of society at large, and as such, it models future consequences a student may encounter in the civil and criminal justice systems. As a general rule, community service is performed on campus and is subject to availability.

Educational Sanctions: Where appropriate to the conduct violation, educational sanctions may include: Attendance at community court, parental notification where students under the age of 21 have been found in violation of drug and/or alcohol laws of the State of Minnesota, restitution for damages to property, undergoing counseling and/or assessments, attending workshops or seminars, formal apologies, mandated mediation or fulfilling other possible sanctions dictated by the circumstances of the offense.

Sanction guidelines are provided to all University personnel involved in the discipline process. These guidelines are not official or binding on the University. They are an informal guide and are intended to provide a measure of fairness and consistency with regard to the most common code violations adjudicated in the discipline process. Copies of the sanction guidelines are available for review in the Office of the Dean of Students.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Hearing Procedures

The following procedures shall apply to all formal hearings before a University Hearing Board or the Discipline Committee. The Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences may use these following procedures for cases involving academic discipline.

  1. During the hearing all information shall be presented as fully as possible. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all disciplinary hearings shall be closed to the University community, the general public, and the press.
  2. A student shall have the right to be present during the presentation of all testimony. A student shall not have the right to directly cross-examine witnesses, but may direct questions through the chairperson of the hearing body.
  3. The student may, but need not, make verbal responses to the charges brought against him/her and to the testimony of witnesses during the hearing process. This does not indicate acceptance of responsibility for the charges on the part of the student.
  4. A student shall have the right to present witnesses, documentation, or other evidence on his/her behalf. Such rights shall be subject to reasonable limitation in order to avoid unduly prolonged hearings. Character reference testimony is allowed at the discretion of the chair of the hearing body. Written statements regarding character will be limited by the discretion of the chair of the hearing body.
  5. The University may call witnesses to the incident, present documentation, and be advised by counsel (where appropriate).
  6. A student may have present with him/her parents, relatives, attorney, or a judicial advisor from the school (i.e., a student or member of the faculty or administration). Such person or persons shall not participate in any manner in the proceedings. A student may also request a trained advisor to assist her/him either before or during the hearing. A list of trained advisors is available in the Dean of Students office.
  7. All hearings by a University Hearing Board or the Discipline Committee shall be audio recorded. Copies will not be made available to parties involved in the hearing, but will be available to appeal bodies.
  8. The deliberations of a University Hearing Board and the Discipline Committee will be closed to all persons except members of the hearing body and those persons requested to be present for deliberations by the unanimous approval of the hearing body. The CJO is an advisor to all hearing bodies and may be present for deliberations.
  9. University Hearing Boards and the Discipline Committee reserve the right to establish their own rules and guidelines for the review of any case provided they do not violate the fundamental fairness of the hearing.

Exceptions to the previous procedures

In cases involving an on-campus victim, that person normally will be in attendance to provide testimony at the hearing. In cases involving violence or sexual misconduct, at the request of the victim, and subject to the discretion of the chairperson, a screen may be used to separate the victim from the accused. Under extreme circumstances, the victim may be seated in a separate room, but both the victim and the accused must be able to hear and participate in the process through an intercom system. The accused will have the right to hear all testimony against him/her directly. There can be no cross-examination or other exchange between the victim and the accused.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Parental Notification

The Dean of Students or the Dean's designee may notify parents or legal guardians (notification will be made to parent or legal guardians listed in University records as guardians or parents) of disciplinary and other matters under the following conditions:

  1. The health and well being of a student is determined to be at risk. This includes:
    • Situations involving suicide, attempted suicide or when students are doing harm to themselves.
    •  Situations where a student is missing and their whereabouts are unknown.
    • Situations where a student is hospitalized.
    • Incidents where a student are incapacitated requiring EMTs to be called to the scene.
  2. When students are placed on conduct probation for violations of the University Code of Conduct with respect to use or possession of alcohol and/or drugs and the student is under 21 years of age. In cases where students would be at risk due to family situations, the University reserves the right not to notify parents or legal guardians
  3. University staff may contact parents or guardians of students found to be in violation of the University Code of Conduct involving drugs or alcohol when the student is less than 21 years of age. As a general rule, parents will be notified in situations where a student under the age of 21 has been found responsible for a second alcohol violation.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Confidentiality

The discipline process is confidential subject to University policy, Federal and State Law. Confidentiality covers the records of hearings and the decisions rendered. Third parties normally will not have access to a student's file unless the student provides written permission. The University's policy statement concerning the implementation of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA) describes the circumstances under which the contents of such records may be disclosed without the consent of the student. For more information on FERPA please access the University Registrar's Office Website.

- Return to top of page -

  1. Disciplinary Records

While conduct files do not go on a student's academic record, a student's disciplinary file is considered a part of his or her educational record. All discipline files are kept in the Office of the Dean of Students.

  1. Records of cases resulting in a decision of "not responsible" are destroyed at the end of the current academic year.
  2. Records that consist of sanctions other than suspension or expulsion from a residence hall and/or the University are destroyed at graduation or after two years upon separation or withdrawal from the University.
  3. Records of suspensions and expulsions from the University or University housing are kept on file indefinitely.
  4. Records of students who withdraw from the University prior to disciplinary action being taken may be held indefinitely.

If a student meets the condition of his/her suspension and is allowed to re-enroll in the University, the student's file, at the Dean's discretion, may be destroyed at graduation or after two years upon voluntary withdrawal from the University. Students who have been suspended or expelled from the University or University housing may petition the Dean of Students for the removal of their file two years after the date of expulsion or suspension.

- Return to top of page -