Judges: DANIEL E. LUNGREN, Attorney General
Filed Date: 4/24/1997
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
DANIEL E. LUNGREN Attorney General ANTHONY M. SUMMERS Deputy Attorney General
THE HONORABLE DICK MONTEITH, MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA SENATE, has requested an opinion on the following questions:
1. Under what circumstances may a pupil be expelled from school for "possessing" a firearm?
2. What circumstances constitute an abuse of discretion by a county board of education in reversing the decision of a governing board of a school district to expel a pupil?
3. May the governing board of a school district seek judicial review of a decision of the county board of education reversing the district board's decision to expel a pupil?
2. A county board of education abuses its discretion in reversing the decision of a governing board of a school district to expel a pupil if it does not comply with the statutory requirements applicable to such review.
3. The governing board of a school district may seek judicial review of a decision of the county board of education reversing the district board's decision to expel a pupil.
The three questions presented for resolution concern the expulsion of a pupil for possessing a firearm on school property. What does "possession" mean, when does a county board of education abuse its discretion in reversing a school board's decision to expel a pupil, and may the school board seek judicial review of the county board's decision?
1. "Possession" of a Firearm
Section
"A pupil may not be suspended from school or recommended for expulsion unless the superintendent or the principal of the school in which the pupil is enrolled determines that the pupil has:
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"(b) Possessed, sold, or otherwise furnished any firearm, knife, explosive, or other dangerous object unless, in the case of possession of any object of this type, the pupil had obtained written permission to possess the item from a certificated school employee, which is concurred in by the principal or the designee of the principal.
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"A pupil may not be suspended or expelled for any of the acts enumerated unless that act is related to school activity or school attendance occurring within a school under the jurisdiction of the superintendent or principal or occurring within any other school district.
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."
Section
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"(c) The principal or superintendent of schools shall immediately suspend, pursuant to Section
48911 , and shall recommend expulsion of a pupil that he or she determines has committed any of the following acts at school or at a school activity off school grounds."(1) Possessing, selling, or otherwise furnishing a firearm. This subdivision does not apply to an act of possessing a firearm if the pupil had obtained prior written permission to possess a firearm from a certificated school employee, which is concurred in by the principal or the designee of the principal. This subdivision applies to an act of possessing a firearm only if the possession is verified by an employee of a school district.
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."
The first question concerns the meaning of the terms "possessed" and "possessing" in sections
In addressing this question, we rely on well established principles of statutory construction. We are to interpret statutes so as to effectuate the intent of the Legislature. (Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. (1989)
"Possession" in this context has been defined by the courts as the immediate control of an object; the thing possessed must be under the dominion of the possessor. (People v. Bigelow (1951)
Accordingly, if a pupil is handed a firearm by another pupil, brings it to a restroom, and abandons it, such acts constitute a violation of section
We conclude in answer to the first question that a pupil may be expelled from school for "possessing" a firearm if the pupil knowingly and voluntarily has direct control over the firearm. The only exceptions are where the pupil has the permission of school officials to possess the firearm (§§
2. Abuse of Discretion
The second question presented concerns the circumstances under which a county board of education abuses its discretion in reversing the decision of a school board to expel a pupil. We conclude that the failure to comply with the governing statutory requirements would constitute an abuse of discretion.
Following expulsion by the governing board of a school district, an appeal to the county board of education is available to the pupil or the pupil's parent or guardian. (§
"(a) The review by the county board of education of the decision of the governing board shall be limited to the following questions:
"(1) Whether the governing board acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction.
"(2) Whether there was a fair hearing before the governing board.
"(3) Whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion in the hearing.
"(4) Whether there is relevant and material evidence which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not have been produced or which was improperly excluded at the hearing before the governing board.
"(b) As used in this section, a proceeding without or in excess of jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, a situation where an expulsion hearing is not commenced within the time periods prescribed by this article, a situation where an expulsion order is not based upon the acts enumerated in Section
48900 , or a situation involving acts not related to school activity or attendance."(c) For purposes of this section, an abuse of discretion is established in any of the following situations:
"(1) If school officials have not met the procedural requirements of this article.
"(2) If the decision to expel a pupil is not supported by the findings prescribed by Section
48915 .
"(3) If the findings are not supported by the evidence.
A county board of education may not reverse the decision of a governing board to expel a pupil based upon a finding of an abuse of discretion unless the county board of education also determines that the abuse of discretion was prejudicial."
A county board's decision is also circumscribed by the terms of section
"The decision of the county board shall be limited as follows:
"(a) Where the county board finds that relevant and material evidence exists which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not have been produced or which was improperly excluded at the hearing before the governing board, it may do either of the following:
"(1) Remand the matter to the governing board for reconsideration and may in addition order the pupil reinstated pending such reconsideration.
"(2) Grant a hearing de novo upon reasonable notice thereof to the pupil and to the governing board. The hearing shall be conducted in conformance with the rules and regulations adopted by the county board under Section
48919 ."(b) In all other cases, the county board shall enter an order either affirming or reversing the decision of the governing board. In any case in which the county board enters a decision reversing the local board, the county board may direct the local board to expunge the record of the pupil and the records of the district of any references to the expulsion action and such expulsion shall be deemed not to have occurred."
These statutes define the scope of the county board's discretion. If a county board should act in a manner not authorized by the statutes, such failure would constitute an abuse of discretion. (See Code Civ. Proc., §
Accordingly, we conclude in answer to the second question that a county board of education abuses its discretion in reversing the decision of a governing board of a school district to expel a pupil if it does not comply with the statutory requirements applicable to such administrative review.
3. Judicial Review
The final question presented is whether the governing board of a school district may seek judicial review of the decision of a county board of education reversing the school board's decision to expel a pupil. We conclude that it may.
Section
"The decision of the county board of education shall be final and binding upon the pupil and upon the governing board of the school district. The pupil and the governing board shall be notified of the final order of the county board, in writing, either by personal service or by certified mail. The order shall become final when rendered."
Do the words "final" and "binding" contained in section
In Fremont Union High Sch. Dist. v. Santa Clara County Bd. ofEducation (1991)
While there is no explicit statutory directive for judicial review of a county board's decision concerning expulsion, it is the general rule that the decisions of administrative bodies rendering quasi-judicial decisions are reviewable under the administrative mandate provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section
We thus conclude in answer to the third question that the governing board of a school district may seek judicial review of a decision of the county board of education reversing the district board's decision to expel a pupil.