University of Virginia Library

No Formalities

One of the distinctive
features in an honor trial is
that it does not resort to all the
formalities practiced in a court
of law. Law books and
precedents, essential tools in
court, are of little help at an
honor trial. Complying,
however, with the principles of
procedural fairness an honor
trial is intended to give an
accused student the
opportunity and all the
latitude needed to defend
himself. The following two
references are offered to those
who feel strongly about Mr.
Carmona's forthcoming
defense and his grounds of
double jeopardy.

In: Asa S. Knowles,
Handbook of College and
University Administration:
Academic, p.1-16: "There has
been an attempt, thus far
unsuccessful and justifiably so,
on the part of some students to
claim the constitutional right
of double jeopardy as provided
for in the Fifth Amendment of
the United States Constitution
and the constitutions of
probably all the states in the
union. In the author's opinion,
this argument is not legally
supportable because the double
jeopardy clause applies only to
criminal prosecutions for
violations of state or federal
statutes, and no authority
whatsoever has been uncovered
which would even indicate that
the question of double
jeopardy has any bearing in
those situations where the
student is not only convicted
in a court for violation of
statute but, as a consequence,
is also suspended or dismissed
from an educational institution
pursuant to its rules and
regulations of student
conduct."

In June 1967, The
American Association of
University Professors, and
three other Associations
drafted the Joint Statement on
Rights and Freedoms of
Students. Under article V there
appears: "Students who violate
the law may incur penalties
prescribed by civil authorities
but institutional authority
should never be used merely to
duplicate the function of
general laws."

It is possible that these
references could have some
bearing on Mr. Carmona's case
were he tried by the Judiciary
Committee and not by the
Honor Committee.