MARC CRAWLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEE; ZACHARY MOSER, APPELLANT, V. SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Expulsion orders are reversed because the School Board failed to present proof that the students were "under the influence" of an illegal drug as required by the rule.
Two high school students were expelled for allegedly violating a school rule prohibiting being on school property while under the influence of an ille…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
At the conclusion of separate administrative proceedings, the School Board of Pinel-las County expelled Zachary Moser and Marc Crawley from high school. Each has timely appealed the final order of expulsion in these consolidated appeals. Because the expulsion orders were entered without the requisite proof of a rule violation, we reverse.
Mr. Moser and Mr. Crawley were expelled from high school for allegedly violating the Pinellas County Schools 1996-1997 Code of Student Conduct Rule (7)(b)(2). This rule, part of the School Board’s “Zero Tolerance Policy,” prohibits a student from being on school property while under the influence of an illegal drug.
To sustain an expulsion order premised on section (7)(b)(2), the School Board, as the charging body, must present proof that the student is “under the influence.” Often, either an expert witness or a person who has observed the cited student’s behavior or physical condition will testify. Here, however, the record fails to present even a scintilla of evidence that either student was “under the influence.” In the absence of evidentiary proof, a factual conclusion of “under the influence” is not supportable. Therefore, the expulsion order must be reversed.
We understand the School Board’s concern and the basis for its Zero Tolerance Policy. However, that policy does not override the need for proof of a necessary element of the charged violation as set out in the rule itself.
Because we are reversing the expulsion order as not supported by the evidence, we need not address the other issues raised in this appeal. We reverse and remand with instructions to the School Board of Pinellas County to expunge the expulsion from the school records of Mr. Moser and Mr. Craw-ley.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., CASANUEVA, J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., (Senior) Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.B.E. v. Sch. Bd. OF Brevard Cnty., 33 So. 3d 795 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…d. of Pasco County., 961 So. 2d 382, 384 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (finding that “the testimony presented at the hearing did not constitute competent substantial evidence that [the student] was under the influence”); Crawley v. Sch. Bd. of Pinellas County, 721 So. 2d 396, 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (finding that "the record fails to present even a scintilla of evidence that either student was ‘under the influence’ ”). . In tacit recognition of their proof problem, on appeal, the School Board has shifted its focus to su…
-
Shasta Mott v. Desoto Cnty. Sch. Bd., 2017 WL 1951097 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…possession, receipt, or delivery of illegal drugs" on campus. The Board alleged that D.G. was under the influence of drugs on campus, and this is not an enumerated offense in the zero tolerance policy. Cf. Crawley v. Sch. Bd. of Pinellas Cty., 721 So. 2d 396, 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (noting that part of the school board's zero tolerance policy prohibited a student from being on school property while under the influence of an illegal drug). We will not read into the rule conduct that is not expressly…