UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
March 13-14, 1970


Pages 431-434

                       BOARD OF REGENTS


                        March 13, 1970

The Board of Regents met on the above date in the Travis Lounge,

Jot Travis Student Union building, University of Nevada, Reno.

Members present:  Fred M. Anderson, M. D.

                  Mr. A. C. Grant

                  Mr. Procter Hug, Jr.

                  Mr. Harold Jacobsen

                  Mrs. Molly Knudtsen

                  Louis Lombardi, M. D.

                  Mr. R. J. Ronzone

                  Mr. Albert Seeliger

                  Dr. Juanita White

Members absent:   Mr. Thomas G. Bell

                  Mr. James H. Bilbray

Others present:   Chancellor Neil D. Humphrey

                  President N. Edd Miller, UNR

                  President R. J. Zorn, UNLV

                  Acting Director Joseph Warburton, DRI

                  Chief Deputy Attorney General Daniel Walsh

                  Mr. James Hardesty, ASUN President

Mr. Hug called the meeting to order at 1:35 P.M., stating that it

was a regular meeting of the Board of Regents, called for this

date and time for the purpose of considering a disciplinary mat-

ter which had been referred to the Board of Regents by the

Referral Board.  Mr. Hug noted the presence of Mr. Jesse

Sattwhite, UNR student; Professor Benjamin Hazard and Mr. Harold

Gloyd, advisors to Mr. Sattwhite.

Mr. Hug read the following statement:

"The Board of Regents has had referred to it by the Referral

Board, a disciplinary matter concerning Jesse Sattwhite. I recom-

mend to the Board of Regents, as its Chairman, the following


"The Board of Regents should recognize and approve the judicial

machinery established by the Constitution of the Associated

Students of the University of Nevada, Reno, for student

disciplinary action.

"Article V of the Student Constitution provides that the Referral

Board shall determine the jurisdiction of all cases involving

student disciplinary action, and shall refer each case to that

disciplinary body which is determined to have jurisdiction.  The

Referral Board is composed of faculty and student members,

including the Chief Justice of the Student Judicial Council.

"The Referral Board has referred this student disciplinary action

to the Board of Regents.  This is appropriate, not because the

Board of Regents should conduct the hearing, but because proce-

dural guidelines should be established.

"It is not appropriate for the Board of Regents to hear this

matter in the first instance because this would preclude any

appellate review within the University System.  The only avenue

of appeal would then be a writ of certiorari to the Nevada

Supreme Court.

"It is therefore my recommendation that the Board of Regents

refer this matter to the President of the University of Nevada,

Reno, with instructions to designate an appropriate hearing

board to conduct a hearing of these charges within two (2) weeks.

The appropriate body to hear the charges may well be the Student

Judicial Council.  It is my recommendation that we leave this to

the discretion of the President.  However, we should note that in

situations such as this, where serious charges are involved

which, if proved, may well result in expulsion, it would be wise

to appoint, as the presiding officer, a person who has legal or

judicial experience.  This is to assure that due process require-

ments are met in the conduct of the hearing.  This is particular-

ly true where either one or both sides is represented by an

attorney.  In this instance, it would apprear that the University

Attorney should present the case against the student.

"A suggested approach which the Board of Regents may recommend

to the President would be to designate the Student Judicial

Council as the hearing board and to designate a person with

legal or judicial experience to act as the presiding officer of

the hearing.  A Court Reporter should be present in this case to

record the hearing.

"Under the Constitution of the Associated Students of the

University of Nevada, Reno, the Student Judicial Council may

render decisions of acquittal, warning, and probation, and may

recommend suspension and expulsion.  The decision of the Student

Judicial Council may be appealed to the Dean of Student Affairs

and then to the President of the University.  The final decision

on suspension and expulsion rests with the President.

"This same appellate procedure should be followed with regard to

any hearing board that the President designates to hear this


"In the event of a decision of suspension or expulsion, the

Board of Regents should serve as the final board of appeal

within the University System.  It should not take testimony or

conduct a hearing, but only review the proceedings below, to

determine whether procedural due process has been followed."

Mr. Hug recommended the above statement be adopted by the Board

and requested discussion from those present.  (A transcript of

the discussion is on file in the Chancellor's Office.)

Mr. Grant moved that the procedures as outlined by Mr. Hug be

approved.  Motion seconded by Dr. White.

Dr. Anderson moved that the motion be amended to add the follow-

ing sentence to the next to the last paragraph in Mr. Hug's

statement:  "Either side may appeal and the penalty may either

be reversed, reduced or increased."  Dr. Anderson's motion to

amend failed for lack of second.

Mr. Grant moved to amend his motion to extend the time in which

a hearing should be called from two weeks to four weeks.

Amendment accepted by Dr. White.  Motion as amended carried

without dissent.

The meeting adjourned at 2:14 P.M.

                                 Mrs. Bonnie Smotony

                                 Secretary to the Board