1. (a) There was a violation of procedural safeguards, e.g.:

   1. (1) The ward has no access to and thereby no prior knowledge of the rules and related deprivations.
   2. (2) The ward was not given a copy of the notice of disciplinary hearing.
   3. (3) The ward was not advised of or was denied his right to representation.
   4. (4) The ward was not given 24 hours to prepare his case.
   5. (5) The ward was not given the opportunity to confront his accusers, except for confidential witnesses.
   6. (6) The prescribed time limits for a hearing were exceeded.
   7. (7) The ward did not receive an impartial hearing by an independent fact finder.
2. (b) Evidence which was unavailable at the time of the fact finding and now is available which would be material to the findings.
3. (c) Evidence was not presented or was insufficient to support a finding on each of the necessary elements of the institution rule violation(s).
4. (d) Dispositions were disproportionate and/or inappropriate to the findings based upon past and current practices.

A ward has the right to appeal those disciplinary decision making actions which meet at least one of the following criteria:

Note: Authority cited: Section 1712, Welfare and Institutions Code. Reference: Sections 1001, 1002, 1004 and 1752, Welfare and Institutions Code.

History

1. Change without regulatory effect renumbering title 15, section 4652 to title 9, section 30715 filed 2-13-2020 pursuant to section 100, title 1, California Code of Regulations (Register 2020, No. 7).