Appendix G : Code of Academic Conduct - Part 1
- Prohibited Conduct
- Administration of the Code
- Reporting Suspected Violations
- Rights of the Respondent
- Responsibilities of the Honor Board
- Initial Hearing
- Recognizing that, as students in preparation for entrance to the legal profession, we are committed to the highest principles of professional conduct, we the students of the University of Denver College of Law adopt this Code of Academic Conduct. The purpose of this Code of Academic Conduct is to establish rules and procedures by which the conduct of students in academic matters shall be governed at the College of Law.
- Recognizing that no code or set of rules can be framed which will adequately particularize all the duties of the law student in the varying phases of student life, or in all the relations of a professional career, this Code is intended to guide students in the pursuit of their academic affairs. This Code is not to be construed as a limitation on the broader scope of professional responsibility governing law students and lawyers alike and should in no way interfere with any other rules and regulations governing that professional responsibility.
- Recognizing that no system can operate effectively without the cooperation of the participants of the system, THIS CODE IS ESTABLISHED IN THE BELIEF THAT THE SYSTEM CREATED BY IT CAN ONLY BE EFFECTIVE IF EVERY STUDENT IS FULLY CONSCIOUS OF HIS/HER RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER IT AND IS IN SYMPATHY WITH THE PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH THIS CODE IS BASED.
- This Code is intended to apply to all academic matters at the University of Denver College of Law such as, but not limited to, examinations, papers, law review service, clinical education programs, and all other activities which may earn a student credit for graduation. This Code is also intended to cover participation by all students at the College of Law participating in academic matters, whether or not enrolled for the purpose of obtaining a degree from the College of Law. The primary relationship among students in any educational environment is an academic one and this Code is limited to that relationship.
- The procedures established by this Code are designed to be the exclusive procedures for dealing with violations within the ambit of this Code. Sanctions for violations of this Code shall not be imposed except through the process of this Code, and then only for violative conduct set forth in Section III.
- Proceedings initiated or actions taken under this Code shall not be considered to be in the nature of disciplinary action unless so designated by the Dean of the College of Law in the final imposition of a sanction pursuant to Section X (f) (l) of this Code.
- All students enrolled at the College of Law are deemed to have knowledge of what constitutes prohibited conduct under this Code pursuant to Section XV (a) of this Code. The following shall be violations of this Code of Academic Conduct whether done knowingly or negligently:
- During an examination, take-home examination, or makeup examination:
- To use materials other than those authorized by the instructor; or
- To give, solicit, receive, take, or use any information or assistance other than that which is specifically permitted by the examination instructions; or
- To engage in any act specifically prohibited by the written or oral instructions governing the examination.
- In the case of a student who is taking or has taken an examination, to discuss that examination with anyone whom he/she knows, or should know, is taking or will be taking the same examination, unless permitted by the written or oral instructions governing the examination.
- To begin an examination before the starting time designated by the person administering the examination, or to continue to write an examination after the expiration of the time allotted by the instructor and/or person administering the examination.
- During an examination, take-home examination, or makeup examination:
- Writing Assignments
- Concerning the preparation of research or other writing assignments:
- To engage in any acts specifically prohibited by the written or oral instructions governing the assignment; or
- To submit as one’s own work the work or part of the work of another; or
- To plagiarize, which is defined generally, though not exclusively, as using without due credit the works, expressions, phraseology, or productions of another; or
- To make misrepresentations as to work done toward the satisfaction of the requirements for a grade or credit.
- Concerning the preparation of research or other writing assignments:
- Use of the Law Library
- Concerning the use of the University of Denver College of Law Library, to take or attempt to take without authorization, to conceal or attempt to conceal, or to destroy or attempt to destroy material belonging to the Library.
- Failure, knowingly or without justification, to cooperate with the Honor Board or with the Review Board in efforts to investigate, hear, or review charges brought under this Code, is a violation. Silence on the part of any respondent brought before the Honor Board shall not be construed as a failure to cooperate subjecting him/her to an additional violation on that ground.
- A student may seek assistance from a professor or member of the administration in determining the proper rule in a particular situation.
- It is the duty of each student to monitor himself/herself concerning the specific time designated for beginning or ceasing to take an examination. A student should not rely on any other person to inform him/her that the examination time has expired.
- The general provisions of the disciplinary procedures at the University of Denver pertain to such activities as stealing. Subsection (a) (3) (A) concerning the use of the Law Library is not intended to be a vehicle by which a student may be subjected to double jeopardy with respect to a violation of subsection (a) (3) (A). Therefore, in the event that jurisdiction is actually assumed pursuant to the general disciplinary procedures of the University before the Honor Board has assumed jurisdiction, then such fact should be made known to the Honor Board by the respondent. The Honor Board should proceed accordingly.
Administration of the Code
All students, including members of the Honor Board, faculty members, and members of the administration have an affirmative duty to take constructive action under this Code in the event of committing or observing a violation or an apparent violation of this Code. Constructive action may include, but shall not be limited to, any or all of the following actions:
- Reporting the matter formally to a member of the Honor Board under the procedures set forth in Section V (a) of this Code.
- Discussing the matter in general terms, using no names or identifying facts, with one or more members of the Honor Board to consider whether a formal complaint should be filed. After such consultation, the individual taking such constructive action has the responsibility to decide whether the matter should be formally reported to a member of the Honor Board.
- Discussing the matter in general terms, using no names or identifying facts, with one or more members of the faculty to consider whether a formal complaint should be filed. After such consultation, the individual taking constructive action has the responsibility to decide whether the matter should be reported formally to a member of the Honor Board.
- Discussing the matter with the individual allegedly in violation of this Code. If such discussion does not resolve doubts about the possibility of a violation, the matter should be formally reported to a member of the Honor Board.
- Although constructive action is not limited to the above, any action taken should be similar in nature, such as discussing the matter with a neutral party.
Reporting Suspected Violators
- If after taking constructive action under Section IV of this Code, a person believes that the matter should be formally reported to the Honor Board, the person should immediately contact any member of the Honor Board. The Honor Board member shall inform the complainant that he/she should submit a written complaint, limited to the complainant’s allegations, the name(s) of the alleged violator(s), and a general description of the alleged violative conduct.
- The informed member of the Honor Board shall, after receipt of the written complaint, request that the Chairperson of the Honor Board:
- Convene the Board at the earliest possible and practical opportunity for the initial hearing in the case; and
- Notify the alleged violator (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) in writing of:
- The general nature of the complaint against him/her;
- His/her present and ongoing right to counsel as provided in Section VI of this Code;
- The date, time, and place set for the initial hearing;
- His/her right to be present at the initial hearing; and
- His/her rights in the selection of a Code Advocate in the case.
Rights of the Respondent
- The respondent shall have the right to retain student or outside counsel at any time and such right shall continue throughout all proceedings to which he/she is a party. The respondent shall have the right to have such counsel present at any time the respondent himself/herself may be present at the proceedings under this Code. In any and every case where counsel is retained by the respondent, it is understood that said counsel, whether student or outside counsel, shall adhere to the Colorado Code of Professional Responsibility and shall be bound to follow the procedures and provisions of this Code.
- A member of the Honor Board may be disqualified at any time from further participation in an individual case upon a motion by the respondent, or by a member of the Honor Board and in either case a determination by a majority of the remaining members of the Honor Board that the continued participation of the member in question could reasonably be found to seriously jeopardize the fairness of the proceedings. Such motion shall be made part of the whole record in the case.
If such disqualification(s) would reduce the Investigative Panel and/or the Adjudicative Panel below a quorum, the President of the Student Bar Association shall appoint from among the members of the Student Bar Association Senate as many Senator(s) as necessary to provide a quorum for proceedings in that case. These appointed members shall be subject to all responsibilities of Honor Board members.
- In the event that a respondent is alleged to have committed two or more violations of this Code arising out of two or more unrelated sets of facts or circumstances, the respondent may, at the initial hearing and before the selection of the Code Advocate, request a separate proceeding concerning each such alleged violation. Such request shall be granted unless a majority of the Honor Board determines that the rights of the respondent would not be prejudiced by a consolidated proceeding.
- In the event that the complaint names two or more respondents whose alleged violations of this Code arise out of the same set of facts or circumstances, each such respondent may, at the initial hearing and before the selection of the Code Advocate, request a separate proceeding as to his/her alleged violation. Such request shall be granted unless a majority of the Honor Board determines that the rights of the respondents would not be prejudiced by a consolidated proceeding.
- A complete tape recording shall be made of the initial hearing, investigatory hearing, and adjudicatory hearing, if one is necessary, which recording shall be made available to the Review Board on review pursuant to Section XI of this Code. If there is a finding of insufficient cause to proceed with an adjudicatory hearing or a finding of no violation at the adjudicatory hearing, the Chairperson shall destroy the tape recording after the termination of all proceedings under this Code. If there is a finding of a violation, the Chairperson shall retain the tape recording for uses consistent with the provisions of this Code.
- All proceedings of the Honor Board and of the Review Board shall be conducted in strict confidentiality, except that the adjudicatory hearing may be open to the public at the request of the respondent. The findings of the Boards may also be made public upon a motion by the respondent.
Responsibilities of the Honor Board
The Honor Board, collectively and individually, shall be charged with the following duties:
- To keep all matters of the Honor Board in strict confidentiality.
- To decide all cases in fundamental fairness.
- To publish any interpretation of this Code arising out of a determination made in a particular case which the Board, in its discretion, deems to be fundamental, whether the interpretation is made by the Honor Board or the Review Board, so as to put the entire student body on notice as to the meaning of this Code. All such publications shall be made in such a manner so as to preserve the anonymity of the respondent and all others involved. All such publications and any other publications under this Code shall be posted on the Dean’s bulletin board for a period of at least two weeks during an academic quarter.
- To make available to all respondents the permanent records of the Honor Board, as defined in Section XIV of this Code, in order that such respondents may make use of the precedent established by the existing and all previous Honor and Review Boards.
- At the beginning of each academic year, to solicit student volunteers willing to represent any respondent before the Honor Board. Upon the request of a respondent who cannot or does not wish to procure his/her own counsel, the Honor Board shall make the names of these volunteers available to such respondent.
- In an effort to avert potential violations or interpretive problems concerning this Code, to assist students, upon request, in situations which involve the possible application of this Code.
- In each case, at the initial hearing of the Honor Board, the Board shall, after a determination that a quorum is present:
- Explain fully to the respondent the procedures to be followed by the Honor Board under this Code and the rights of the respondent in the context of those procedures; and
- Conduct the selection of the Code Advocate from among its student members, not including the Chairperson. To avoid prejudice, the respondent shall draw the name of one student member of the Honor Board. If that person is acceptable to the respondent, that person shall be designated as the Code Advocate for that case. If for any reason the first person whose name is drawn is unacceptable to the respondent, the respondent may, without revealing the identity of the first person drawn, decline to allow that person to serve as Code Advocate. Thereafter, the respondent shall draw additional names, having the right to challenge and disqualify from serving as Code Advocate such individuals only upon a showing of just cause. Disqualification as Code Advocate shall not amount to disqualification under Section VI (b) of this Code.
- The Code Advocate, whether a member of the Honor Board or not, shall be charged with the duty to fairly investigate the complaint against the respondent. In the performance of this duty the Code Advocate shall:
- Immediately upon his/her selection and thereafter for the duration of the case, refrain from discussing the case with either the members of the Honor Board or any other person except as necessary for the purposes of the investigation. If drawn from the membership of the Honor Board, the Code Advocate shall not participate in any deliberations or votes in the case.
- Conduct the investigation in a fair and impartial manner, gathering information and interviewing witnesses, both supporting and refuting the allegations.
- At all times, make available to the respondent all evidence, both exculpatory and inculpatory, generated by his/her investigation.
- The Chairperson shall then divide the remaining student members of the Board, including himself/herself, into two panels, each of three members with one alternate. The Chairperson shall designate one panel as the Investigative Panel for the case, and the other as the Adjudicative Panel for the case. Each Panel shall select one of its members to conduct the hearing before it in a proper and orderly manner. The Investigative Panel shall determine at an investigatory hearing whether there is sufficient cause to go forward. If the Investigative Panel determines that there is sufficient cause to go forward, an adjudicatory hearing shall be conducted before the Adjudicative Panel pursuant to Section X. Members of the Board may be assigned by the Chairperson from one panel to the other, but in no event shall a member who has participated as a member of the Investigative Panel in a particular case be assigned to the Adjudicative Panel in the same case. The nonvoting faculty participant may be present at all hearings conducted by the Honor Board and its panels.
- The Code Advocate is chosen from the membership of the Honor Board in order to promote continuity in the responsibilities and high standards of careful investigation and to maintain an atmosphere of confidentiality, aimed at protecting the reputations of both the respondent and the complainant. However, the Board may at any time appoint a student who is not a member of the Honor Board as Code Advocate if a majority of the Board believes that such action would provide a fairer hearing.
- The purpose of the two-panel system is to insure that the determination at the adjudicatory hearing, of whether a violation has occurred, is based solely on the evidence presented at the adjudicatory hearing and is not influenced by prior knowledge of or exposure to such evidence. Accordingly, although the nonvoting faculty participant may be present at both investigative and adjudicative hearings, he/she should in no way contravene this purpose.
- Throughout the year, in dividing the Honor Board into Investigative and Adjudicative Panels, the Chairperson should provide each member with the opportunity to serve as a member of and as an alternate for both Panels.