Student Community Rights and Responsibilities

An appeal is the process to request a review of the original student conduct outcome. The Referred Party has the right to submit one application for appeal to the Director of Student Advocacy and Accountability. In cases of Sexual Misconduct, both parties have the right to appeal. An appeal does not rehear a student conduct case, but rather, determines if the conclusion reached in the original case is valid based on substantiation of a procedural error, new evidence, or the severity of the sanction:

1. Procedural Error: Procedural error occurs when the process and policies outlined in Student Community Rights and Responsibilities (Student Code of Conduct) are not followed, and as a result, the outcome of the case was significantly impacted.
2. New Evidence: This refers to new evidence that was unavailable during the original hearing or investigation that could significantly affect the original finding or sanction. This does not include information available but not disclosed at the Student Conduct Hearing by choice (i.e., opting not to disclose information for any reason).
3. Sanction Severity: A sanction imposed as a result of the original student conduct hearing that is significantly disproportionate to the severity of the offense for which the Respondent/Referred Party has been found responsible. Additional information is available in the Student Community Rights and Responsibilities.

An application for appeal must be submitted electronically within seven calendar days of receiving the decision letter via College email. Instructions on how to file an application for appeal are provided in the decision letter. Applications for appeal may not be submitted by a third party.

The Dean of Students will review the application for appeal to determine if it was submitted prior to the deadline and that the reason for appeal meets one of the three grounds for appeal. If the Dean of Students determines the appeal application meets the grounds the appeal will be referred to an Appeal Board for consideration. The Appeal Board may

• Uphold the decision of the Student Conduct Hearing Board,
• Overturn the decision of the Student Conduct Hearing Board,
• Decide that the case should have a new hearing in front of a different Student Conduct Hearing Board. 

In addition, the Appeal Board can keep the existing sanctions or modify them to be more or less severe than the original sanction(s).  

A written notification of the appeal decision will be made via College email within 30 calendar days. The decision of the Appeal Board is final.   

• Notice of Appeal Form (PDF) 

Download Adobe Reader

The Office of Student Advocacy and Accountability encourages faculty staff and students to participate in the student conduct process in the following ways:

Advisor is any individual who provides the victim/survivor/complainant or the accused/respondent with support, guidance, and/or advice. Both parties are permitted one advisor of their choosing to accompany them and assist them throughout the investigation and conduct process. An advisor may be a friend, parent, faculty, mentor, attorney, or any person they wish. In general, the advisor will not be permitted to speak for the student in the process or to have any role in the process other than to advise and assist them. Advisors for students in the Title IX Grievance Process will conduct cross-examination in the hearing on behalf of the advisee. This is volunteer position and time commitment may vary.

Student Conduct Hearing Officers are persons who hear student conduct referrals, including alleged violations of academic dishonesty. This body consists of one student and two faculty and staff members. The Hearing Board can impose any of the sanctions set forth in the Student Code of Conduct (Student Community Rights and Responsibilities). Decisions are made by a simple majority. Hearing Boards generally hear high level or repeated offenses for which a more severe sanction might be imposed. Hearing Officers also may serve on Appeal Boards to review outcomes of student conduct hearings. This is volunteer position and time commitment may vary. Service on any particular board is based on one's availability.

Eligibility for student members of Student Conduct Hearing Boards:

• Student Board members must be in good academic and conduct standing (i.e., not on probation or higher).
• A general willingness to serve on any scheduled board hearing, regardless of the nature of the incident or the specific charges filed.
• A strict adherence to impartiality, objectivity, punctuality, civility, and confidentiality.
• Must possess a high attention to detail, effective communication skills, and critical thinking skill
• Must complete 8 hours of training annually

View Interest Form for Student Members of the Student Conduct Hearing Boards

Faculty or staff members interested in serving either as advisors or hearing board members should contact the conduct office.

Training Student Conduct Hearing Board Members and Advisors

To serve as a Hearing Officer or Advisor in a Title IX Grievance Procedure requires specialized training which is offered through the SUNY Student Conduct Institute (SUNY SCI). This training includes topics such as how to serve impartially, issues of relevance, including how to apply the rape shield protections provided for complainants, and any technology to be used at the hearing. To view the training materials used in this training, please link to the SCI Training Site.

Training is provided by the SUNY Student Conduct Institute.

SUNY Potsdam Rules of Decorum for Student Conduct Hearings and Sex-Based Discrimination Grievance Procedures for Student to Student Hearings

Campus hearings are not civil or criminal proceedings and are not designed to mimic formal trial proceedings. They are primarily educational in nature. Rules of decorum prohibit any party advisor or decision-maker from questioning witnesses in an abusive, intimidating, or disrespectful manner. At base, these Rules of Decorum require that all parties, advisors of choice, and institutional staff treat others who are engaged in the process with respect. The rules and standards apply equally to all Parties and their Advisors regardless of sex, gender, or other protected class, and regardless of whether they are in the role of Complainant or Respondent. 

The following Rules of Decorum are to be observed in the hearing and applied equally to all parties (meaning the complainant and respondent) and advisors: 

1. Questions must be conveyed in a neutral tone. 
2. Parties and advisors will refer to other parties, witnesses, advisors, and institutional staff using the name and gender used by the person and shall not intentionally mis-name or mis-gender that person in communication or questioning. 
3. No party may act abusively or disrespectfully during the hearing toward any other party or to witnesses, advisors, or decision-makers. 
4. While an advisor may be an attorney, no duty of zealous advocacy should be inferred or enforced within this forum. 
5. No party may yell, scream, badger, or physically ‘‘lean in’’ to a party or witness’s personal space. No party may approach the other party or witnesses without obtaining permission from the Chair of the Hearing Board. 
6. No party may use profanity or make irrelevant ad hominem attacks upon a party or witness. Questions are meant to be interrogative statements used to test knowledge or understand a fact; they may not include accusations within the text of the question. 
7. No party may ask repetitive questions. This includes questions that have already been asked by the Hearing Board, and/or by other parties in cross-examination. When the Hearing Board determines a question has been “asked and answered” or is otherwise not relevant, the questioner must move on. 
8. Parties and advisors may take no action at the hearing that a reasonable person in the shoes of the affected party would see as intended to intimidate that person (whether party, witness, or official) into not participating in the process or meaningfully modifying their participation in the process. 

The Hearing Board shall have sole discretion to determine if the Rules of Decorum have been violated. The Hearing Board will notify the offending person of any violation of the Rules. 

Upon a second or further violation of the Rules, the Hearing Board shall have discretion to remove the offending person or allow them to continue participating in the hearing or other part of the process. 

Where the Hearing Board removes a party’s advisor, the party may select a different advisor of their choice. Reasonable delays, including the temporary adjournment of the hearing, may be anticipated should an advisor be removed. 

The Hearing Board shall document any decision to remove an advisor in the written determination regarding responsibility. 

For flagrant, multiple, or continual violations of this Rule, in one or more proceedings, advisors may be prohibited from participating in future proceedings at the institution in the advisor role on a temporary or permanent basis. Evidence of violation(s) of this agreement will be gathered by the Title IX Coordinator, Director of Student Advocacy and Accountability, or a designee of either and presented to the Dean of Students. The Advisor accused may provide an explanation or alternative evidence in writing for consideration by the Dean of Students. Such evidence or explanation is due within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a notice of a charge violation of the rules of decorum or of re-disclosure or improper access to records. There shall be no right to a live hearing, oral testimony, or cross-examination. The Dean of Students shall consider the evidence under a preponderance of the evidence standard and issue a finding in writing and, if the finding is Responsible, shall include a Sanction. The finding shall be issued in writing to all Parties and Advisors (if there is a current case pending) within thirty (30) business days unless extended for good cause. There is no appeal of this finding. In the event that an Advisor is barred permanently or for a term from serving in the role as Advisor in the future, they may request a review of that bar from the Dean of Students no earlier than three-hundred and sixty-five (365) days after the date of the findings letter. 

Relevant Questions Asked in Violation of the Rules of Decorum 

Where a party asks a relevant question in a manner that violates the Rules, such as yelling, screaming, badgering, or leaning-in to the witness or party’s personal space, the question may not be deemed irrelevant by the decision-maker simply because of the manner it was delivered. Under that circumstance, the decision-maker will notify the party of the violation of the Rules, and, if the question is relevant, will allow the question to be re-asked in a respectful, non-abusive manner by the party.

Revised: August 2024