North Carolina college students subject to discipline by their university have the right to be represented by an attorney in certain proceedings before their university tribunals, a right not afforded to college students in every state. If you are under scholastic or disciplinary investigation or facing charges of misconduct by your university, the list of reasons to take advantage of your right to counsel is long. With your investment in your education at stake and your future on the line, your interests are best supported through the guidance of qualified and experienced legal counsel familiar with the state’s university discipline system.
Our student defense attorneys are well-versed in the various universities’ codes of conduct. We have years of experience, appearing countless times before university tribunals on behalf of students. We can help you understand what you can expect and how to best prepare your defense to prevail at a hearing before your university’s tribunal. Having defended students charged with all manner of alleged misconduct by their respective universities, we can defend you against any charge of misconduct.
Underage Alcohol Charges
University charges of misconduct involving underage alcohol charges include but are not limited to the following:
- Consumption and/or possession of alcohol
- Fake IDs
- Purchasing alcohol for underage drinkers and/or aiding and abetting underage drinking
- Underage DWI
Jeopardy students may face in state court does not curb investigation and discipline by your school. There is no double jeopardy standard that applies here, and the ramifications of each are damaging in different ways. Often university investigations occur secondary to charges through the criminal justice system. At DeMent, Askew & Johnson we have decades of experience and skill defend young people against underage alcohol infractions in all stages of proceedings before your university tribunal and through the criminal justice system.
Russell W. DeMent III
Criminal Defense Lawyer
Misc. Defense Services
Student Honor Court
Every university has its own code of conduct or Honor Code. The Honor Code includes rules governing academic matters such as student honesty and integrity, with which students must abide. Likewise, every university has its own tribunals to enforce the code, conduct hearings, and determine appropriate sanctions for student misconduct. These sanctions may include expulsion, suspension, or a permanent notation on your academic record, all of which jeopardize your investment in your education.
The Student Honor Court is the tribunal at a university charged with enforcing and ensuring student compliance with the Honor Code. If you are subject to discipline for misconduct alleged under your university’s honor code or are otherwise compelled to appear before your university’s student honor court, your right to an attorney is limited. Even though an attorney may not be able to appear in person on your behalf in honor court proceedings, we can help prepare you for the process and to represent yourself.
University Disciplinary Hearings
The criminal justice system and the university discipline system often overlap. Students may find themselves simultaneously facing criminal charges in a state court through the criminal justice system as well as charges of misconduct before a university tribunal. The most common charges that might instigate university discipline and contact with law enforcement and the criminal justice system include:
- Disorderly conduct
- Underage possession of alcohol
- Possession of marijuana for personal use
- Possession of marijuana with intent to distribute
- Possession of a Controlled Substance
- Prescription Drug Charges
- DWI and DWI under 21
- Fake ID possession
Acquittal through one disciplinary proceeding does not ensure the same result in the other. It is important to have legal representation well versed in both.
Our office is conveniently located near university campuses in and around the Triangle area. We have extensive experience representing college students before the various university tribunals. We have helped students through every stage of the disciplinary process for decades. We are skilled and accomplished trial lawyers. We can fully explain all aspects of your case, thoroughly evaluating your disciplinary charges and building your defense, and keep you informed as we proceed. If you are charged with or under investigation for misconduct before your university, we are the experienced attorneys you want at your side. Call DeMent, Askew & Johnson today for a free consultation at 919-833-5555, and take the first step towards preserving the future you have worked so hard to create.
Criminal Law Articles from the Blog
CONNECT WITH US
AVAILABLE AT 9AM TO 6PM
333 Fayetteville Street, #1513
Raleigh, NC 27601-2950
CRIMINAL DEFENSE SUCCESS
Motion to Suppress and Dismiss Granted for Lack of Probable Cause; No Reliable Evidence Suggesting Impairment After Speeding Stop
Motion to suppress and dismiss granted for lack of probable cause to arrest where my client was stopped for speeding, had an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, admitted to drinking, as well as showed signs of impairment on the field sobriety tests. The court put little weight on the field sobriety tests because the officer…
Defendant charged with 2 counts of habitual impaired driving on his 7th total offense. Were able to negotiate a plea consolidating the sentence to one term of 28 months in prison where he was facing the potential for 10 years or more.
Evidence Suppressed in DWI Case; Court Holds “No Reasonable and Articulable Suspicion” for Traffic Stop
All evidence suppressed in DWI case for an illegal stop where the LEO observed my client pause in a parking lot for 30 seconds before leaving the lot and then crossed a center line during a turn at an intersection. Held “No reasonable and articulable suspicion” for a traffic stop.
Guilty Verdict of Less Significant Charges of Driving with License Revoked and Lane Violation; Charges Included DWI, Driving While License Revoked, and Hit and Run; No Jail Time
Client charged with DWI, driving while license revoked for impaired revocation, hit and run, and driving left of center. She was found on side of the road in driver’s seat 400 yards from a collision, showed clues of impairment on the field sobriety tests and blew a .10 on the breath test. Found not guilty…
Defendant had a head-on collision with injuries to both parties. He was given field sobriety tests on the scene of the collision and did not perform well on those tests with the exception of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test where he showed no signs of impairment from any central nervous system depressant. He admitted…
Defendant charged with Level 2 DWI with one prior within 7 years. Was facing a potential sentence of 1 year in prison. Defendant attended a treatment program and really changed her life direction while the case was pending. We were able to get the judge to agree to accept the inpatient treatment as credit for…
Not Guilty of DWI with Serious Collision; LEO Failed to Gather Specific Information from Driver Taken to Hospital with BAC of .17
Client charged with driving while impaired. LEOs respond to a serious collision where someone being taken to the hospital in EMS vehicle upon troopers arrival. The vehicle had flipped 2 times and landed in the median. Based upon information obtained at the scene, the LEO finds my client in the hospital with injuries consistent with…
Client approaches a DWI roadblock. Smells of alcohol and performs ok on field tests though she does so some signs of NHTSA clues of impairment. She admits to drinking and blows positive for presence of alchol on the portable breath test. She is taken to the mobile breath testing bus at the checkpoint. She is…
Client stopped for speeding. LEO smelled odor of MJ about clients person. LEO search revealed burned MJ blunt. Defendant performed poorly on all physical tests but told the officer he suffered from a herniated disk in his lower back. On the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) eye test there were no clues of impairment. A subsequent…
Client charged with level 3 trafficking in opiates which carried minimum mandatory sentencing of a minimum of 225 months (18 years 9 months) in prison. After months of negotiating with the prosecuting attorney and following a lengthy argument to the court, Defendant was sentenced to 65 months (5 years and 5 months) in prison with…