Suspended student in Kent wins an appeal

Email To A Friend
Printer Friendly
Comments

---

By Mike Sever
Record-Courier staff writer
The 11th District Court of Appeals has ruled that the Kent School District failed to follow state law when it suspended a student accused of hacking into a school computer for test study questions.
In an opinion released this week, the court said the district erred when it did not include findings of fact after a suspension hearing involving Shi "Carl" Huang, a senior at Theodore Roosevelt High school in 2007.
The court also said Portage Common Pleas Court Judge Joseph Kainrad, who was filling in for Judge Laurie Pittman, erred when he denied Huang and his parents' motion for an evidentiary hearing to present more evidence. Kainrad affirmed the school board's decision, saying it had complied with "each and every requirement set forth" in the state law.
The appeals panel disagreed and sent the case back to Pittman for a hearing.
The ruling stems out of a lawsuit brought by Housan and Nianyuan Huang to overturn the Kent schools' suspension and attempt to expel their son.
Carl was suspended for five days following a March 2007 hearing. He had admitted guessing his biology teacher's password to the school computer system and accessing a test question bank to study. Carl said the teacher had allowed students access to study for tests the previous semester and that he was frustrated by the change in policy and by the lack of instructional structure in the advanced placement course.
Carl, a Chinese citizen in the U.S. on a student visa, was ranked third in his class, a straight A student, and was a master violinist up to that point, with no disciplinary problems. His parents are in the U.S. on work visas.
The Huangs retained legal counsel and sought a hearing before the school board to challenge the reasons for the suspension and allow their son to explain his actions. Subsequent to that, the district notified the Huangs that Carl was being recommended for expulsion for "violation of statutes."
At that point, criminal charges were pending against Carl by the Kent State University Police, who were asked by the school district to investigate the initial computer break-in. If convicted, the youth could have been deported.
After the appeal hearing, Dr. Joe Giancola, then the assistant superintendent and appeal hearing officer for the Kent school board, notified the Huangs the suspension would be upheld, but did not send to the Huangs nor file in the hearing record, any conclusions of fact, a requirement under Ohio law.
The appeals court found the Huangs were entitled to a hearing at which they could have submitted additional evidence.
The school board admitted it had failed to file findings of fact, but argued the conclusions could be deduced from a review of the record.
"I believe our attorney needs to review the (appeals court) decision and advise us on what the next step is," said Giancola, now superintendent of Kent schools.
"I was encouraged by the court's decision that said "There's no question that Carl broke school rules.' I was encouraged that they recognized some of the same points that we tried to make with all of our hearings."
Unless the school district appeals the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, a civil lawsuit by the Huangs against the school district may now go forward. In addition to monetary damages, the suit wants the school district to remove the suspension from Huang's record, eliminate the failing biology grade from his transcript, restore his class rank and resend transcripts to colleges.