Chapter 5 – Adult Custody and Security Operations

54100.20.3 Rehearing of the Charges

• The original disposition shall be vacated and a new hearing ordered if the reviewer determines that any of the following circumstances apply or are evident:

  • The accused was not given copies of required documents within specified time limits before the hearing and did not waive the time limits.

  • The appellant requested but was not allowed to review a videotape or photographic evidence at least 24 hours prior to the hearing (or within 24 hours of the hearing if he or she waived the 24 hour period).

  • The charge was based upon confidential information and the accused was not given a copy of the CDC Form 1030, Confidential Information Disclosure

  • Confidential information was used and the disciplinary finding did not addresss the reliability of the source and the validity of the information.

  • The disciplinary hearing officer failed to articulate the reasons for finding the accused guilty, the evidence relied upon to make the disposition, or failed to note the reasons why the reporting employee or witness was not present or the reason(s) why time constraints were not met.

  • The accused was inappropriately denied witnesses or denied witness statements or testimony which would have contributed to the accused’s defense.

  • The senior hearing officer and the accused stipulated to what the witness testimony would be and waived the requested witness’ presence at the hearing, but the stipulation was not documented in the hearing portion of the RVR.

  • Failure to obtain and document the appellant’s waiver of the reporting employee’s presence at the disciplinary hearing, when the appellant previously requested the reporting employee’s attendance.

  • The reasons why the hearing was postponed beyond time constraints or the reasons for denying the appellant’s written request for postponement have not been provided, or if provided, are unsound and unsupportable.

  • Failure to document the justification, consistent with regulatory expectations, of why the hearing was suspended.

  • The accused was not allowed to speak or present documentation in their own defense or the hearing officer failed to articulate the defendant’s statement made at the time of the hearing in the body of the RVR.

  • The accused was not assigned a staff assistant or language interpreter if required.

  • An investigative employee (IE) was not assigned if required or the IE did not properly carry out their duties, and it appears that such an investigation was needed.

  • A staff assistant did not properly perform his or her required duties or did not meet with the appellant at least 24 hours prior to the RVR hearing.

  • The hearing official engaged in activities that would lead to a predetermined belief on their part with respect to the appellant’s guilt or innocence relative to the matter in question.