Heightened Secondary Outcomes Policy

I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

This policy reflects the Law School's endorsement of appropriately heightened sanctions and other outcomes for law students which reflect the higher ethical standards that apply to students preparing for the legal profession. In particular, law students found responsible for misconduct under the University's Conduct Code and process face potentially heightened sanctions and other outcomes in that process from the University and the Law School.

Lawyers are held to the highest standards of professional ethics. Law students are also expected to conduct themselves in a manner that is professional, befitting the requirements of good character and fitness for the practice of law. The purpose of the conduct codes and processes which govern the conduct of law students is to help ensure that law students maintain these high standards and are properly prepared to enter the legal profession.

II. CODES AND PROCESSES GOVERNING LAW STUDENT BEHAVIOR

The Law School's Honor Code and the Texas Tech University's Code of Student Conduct are the two codes that govern the conduct of law students at Texas Tech University. The Law School's Honor Code primarily addresses the academic misconduct and lapses of personal integrity of law students. It directly incorporates the higher professional standards that apply to law students. The University's Code of Student Conduct governs the conduct of all TTU students, including undergraduate students, graduate students, and law students. It is a broad-based code that governs many forms of misconduct. The University Code and related processes reflect the higher standards expected of law students in the two ways discussed below.

III. POTENTIAL HEIGHTENED OUTCOMES FOR LAW STUDENTS UNDER THE UNIVERSITY'S CODE AND PROCESS

This policy endorses, when appropriate, heightened sanctions and other outcomes for law students under the University Code and process. The Law School believes that law students should generally be held to higher standards of conduct than undergraduate students and nonprofessional graduate students under the University Code. These higher standards are reflected in the potential for appropriately heightened sanctions and other outcomes issued under the main campus conduct process for violations of the University Code. The Law School, in partnership with University administrators, has endorsed a University procedure for the issuance of proportionately heightened outcomes by University administrators for law student misconduct when appropriate under the circumstances. As a result, law students face potentially heightened sanctions and other outcomes for misconduct under the University conduct code and process. A wide range of aggravating and mitigating circumstances will continue to apply under the University process.

IV. SECONDARY OUTCOMES FOR LAW STUDENTS UNDER THE LAW SCHOOL'S PROFESSIONALISM OUTCOMES PROCESS

In addition to the issuance of appropriately elevated outcomes for law student misconduct under the University code and process, the University process also allows the Law School to directly address professional concerns with secondary outcomes. The Law School's Professional School Secondary Outcomes process is designed to apply additional sanctions and other outcomes to law students to further address any remaining professionalism concerns once a law student is found responsible for a violation of the University Code of Student Conduct by the University's Office for Student Conduct.

A. Relationship to the Law School Honor Code and the University Code of Student Conduct

The Law School's Professional School Secondary Outcomes process is a supplement to the University's student conduct process to consider the assignment of additional outcomes for misconduct reflecting the higher professional standards that apply to law students.

As noted above, the Law School's Honor Code and the Texas Tech University's Code of Student Conduct are the two codes that govern the conduct of law students at Texas Tech University. The University's Code of Student Conduct governs the conduct of all TTU students, including undergraduate students, graduate students, and law students. It is a broad-based code that governs many forms of misconduct. The Law School's Honor Code primarily addresses the academic misconduct and lapses of personal integrity of law students. It directly incorporates the higher professional standards that apply to law students.

The University's Code of Conduct process accounts for the higher standards that apply to law students in two ways. First, the University's Office for Student Conduct, when appropriate under the circumstances, may potentially issue outcomes for law student misconduct that reflect the higher professional standards that apply to law students. Second, the University process allows the Law School's Professional School Secondary Outcomes process described in this document to consider applying additional outcomes to law students to further address professionalism concerns once a law student is found responsible for a violation of the University Code of Student Conduct by the University's Office for Student Conduct.

B. Procedures

1. The University—Office for Student Conduct

The University's Student Handbook contains the University Code of Student Conduct with its detailed provisions and procedures. What follows is a brief account for context. 

Under TTU policy, law student conduct that could be in violation of the University Code of Student Conduct is referred to the University's Office for Student Conduct for review. The Office for Student Conduct reviews the referral to determine whether the behavior violates any provision of the Code and may conduct an investigation and adjudicate the referral under the procedures set forth in the Code. As noted, law students may be held to higher standards than students in other programs.

In the event of a referral involving a law student, the Office for Student Conduct will follow its established procedures to address the referral. If the Office for Student Conduct reaches a finding of responsibility for one or more allegations, the Office will assign a student status (reprimand, probation, suspension, or expulsion) as appropriate and will issue additional stipulations, restrictions, or outcomes in alignment with the Office's sanctioning grid or matrix.

Once a determination of responsibility and outcome has been determined in a case involving a law student, the Office for Student Conduct will copy the Law School Associate Dean for Student Life on a decision letter.

2. The Law School—Professionalism Outcomes Committee

Because of the higher professional standards that apply to law students, the Law School has established a Professionalism Secondary Outcomes process to consider outcomes in addition to those assigned by the Office for Student Conduct. To consider these additional outcomes, each year the Dean will appoint a Professionalism Outcomes Committee (POC) as a standing committee.

After receiving a decision letter from the University's Office for Student Conduct, the Law School's Associate Dean for Student Life will contact the Dean of the Law School and the chair of the Law School's Professionalism Outcomes Committee.

The chair of the POC will convene the committee to consider issuance of additional out- comes—secondary sanctions, stipulations, or restrictions—for the law student.

The Professionalism Outcomes Committee may issue additional outcomes to support the Law School's expectation that law students should conduct themselves in accordance with the higher ethical standards required for those preparing to enter the practice of law. The POC will address additional outcomes for misconduct found under the University's Code of Conduct, including but not limited to misconduct involving alcohol, drugs, assault, theft, bullying, destruction of property, failure to comply, and actions against others. The POC is a body only for determining additional outcomes, and it may not consider any questions involving findings of fact or responsibility.

The POC will base its additional-outcome decisions on the decision letter of the University's Office for Student Conduct and the findings of fact, findings of responsibility, and primary outcomes contained in the letter. When determining additional outcomes, the POC may consider aggravating and mitigating factors recognized by the Office for Student Conduct in the decision letter. If necessary, the POC may also consult with the Office of Student Conduct and/or contact a respondent or complainant to ask clarifying questions.

Additional outcomes the POC may issue include but are not limited to the following:

• A letter of reprimand from the Dean of the Law School
• An apology to harmed persons or parties
• Restitution for damage or loss
• Additional pro-bono hours or community service
• A reflective essay on unprofessional conduct
• Anger management, alcohol awareness, or drug education classes or counseling
• Removal from student leadership positions
• Removal from journals, clinics, competition teams, or student organizations
• Loss of privileges to attend specified Law School events
• Ineligibility for Law School honors and awards
• Loss of scholarships or other Law School financial support

The POC may not issue outcomes such as probation, suspension, or expulsion or any other form of temporary or permanent separation from TTU or the TTU Law School. These decisions are reserved for the conduct process conducted by the Office for Student Conduct.

The POC will conduct its outcomes process and then issue a decision letter with a statement of outcomes and an explanation of its reasoning to the student, the Dean, and the Associate Dean for Student Life.

3. Appellate Review

Students found responsible under the University's Code of Conduct by the Office for Student Conduct may appeal the decision by following the guidelines for appeal set forth in the University's Code.

Students issued additional outcomes—secondary sanctions, stipulations, or restrictions—by the Law School's Professionalism Outcomes Committee may appeal the additional outcomes as detailed in this section on appellate review.

To hear these appeals, the Dean will appoint each year a member of the full-time faculty to serve as the Professionalism Outcomes Appellate Officer.

If a student does not consent to the POC's assigned additional outcomes, the student may appeal the sanction(s) issued by submitting a written request that the outcomes be reduced or vacated and including reasons for the request. The written request must be submitted to the Appellate Officer no later than 10 calendar days from the date of the POC decision letter sent to student, the Dean, and the Associate Dean for Student Life. Grounds for appeal are confined to the Law School's secondary outcomes process and are limited to procedural errors and disproportionate (or otherwise inappropriate) secondary outcomes.

The Appellate Officer may affirm, modify, or vacate any outcomes recommended by the POC, but may not increase their severity. The Appellate Officer will notify the Dean and Professionalism Outcomes Committee Chair of his or her decision. The Law School's Associate Dean of Student Life or Professionalism Outcomes Committee Chair will then notify the student. There is no further review.

The Dean or Dean's Designee will ensure implementation of outcomes after appellate review by the Appellate Officer is complete.

4. Record Keeping and Reporting

The Registrar will record any determinations, findings, outcomes, or sanctions related to misconduct under the Honor Code and the Code of Student Conduct. The Registrar will ensure the record is kept in the appropriate law school files.

The Law School will report any information relevant to character and fitness to the extent required by the Texas Board of Law Examiners ("BLE") or similar authorities in other states, including any determinations of probable cause that a student violated the Law School's Honor Code or the University's Code of Conduct whether or not a finding of responsibility was the ultimate outcome of any process.

Students who have violated Law School or University codes may face formal hearings before the BLE or similar authorities in other states to determine the students' character and fitness to practice law.