Most of the violations became known as the result of depositions taken in association with a lawsuit filed against the university by the former head men's basketball coach. The violations were later self-reported to the NCAA enforcement staff.

A show-cause penalty requires any NCAA institution seeking to employ the individual to appear before the Committee on Infractions to determine whether the individual's athletically related duties should be limited for a specified time.

The Division I Committee on Infractions said it was disturbed that the violations in this case involving the men's basketball program were similar to the institution's previous case. The results of that men's basketball case were released July 16, 1996.

The current case and the 1996 case involved junior college transfers and academic fraud. In the first case, a men's basketball coaching staff member helped prospective student-athletes complete course work and answered questions on final examinations. In this case, the circumstances were similar, but the impermissible academic assistance was provided by the junior college coach of the two prospective student-athletes.

The director of athletics and the university president, who subsequently was informed of the compliance officer's concern, took no action. The committee said the lack of response was astonishing, given that a major infractions case centering on junior college transfers had just been concluded. Committee members said that in most such instances, they would strongly consider making a finding of lack of institutional control. However, because there was an effort by certain individuals at the university to raise concerns about the junior college coach and the fact that the president and athletics director were eventually removed from their positions before the end of this case, the committee decided not to make a finding of a lack of institutional control.

The committee found that the former head coach, with the aid of one of his assistants, reached agreement with the junior college coach to hire the junior college coach if one or both of his prospects committed to attend New Mexico State. The former head coach disputed the finding, maintaining that he did not enter into a verbal, implied or written agreement, but the committee concluded that strong evidence supported the arrangement.

The junior college coach, who later was hired as an assistant at New Mexico State, was determined to be in violation of the NCAA's ethical conduct bylaw, including academic fraud, recruiting inducements, violation of two-year transfer regulations and violation of financial aid eligibility regulations. The committee concluded that at the time the violations occurred, the junior college coach was a representative of the university's athletics interests.

In another unrelated violation, an international student-athlete who had signed a national letter of intent with New Mexico State was falsely informed that he would be ineligible to compete at the university or any other four-year university. The young man traveled, at his own expense, to the university, several days before the start of classes in August 1997. An assistant coach observed him in a pickup basketball game for purposes of evaluating his ability and potential. The men's basketball staff then determined he did not possess the talent needed to contribute to the team and informed the young man of his eligibility status. The coaches then offered the scholarship to another prospective student-athlete.

The former head coach and an assistant coach also were found in violation of NCAA ethical conduct bylaws for their involvement in arranging the employment of the junior college coach. The assistant contended that though he had knowledge of the hiring process, he did not have the authority to make personnel decisions and could not have violated the principles of ethical conduct.

The Committee on Infractions considered self-imposed actions and penalties taken by the university. Among actions that have been or will be taken are:

Beginning in May 1997, the university's Board of Regents took steps that led to a change in the university leadership, and in the following months, a series of further changes was initiated within the athletics department. By the time of the hearing for the present case, the university had in place a new president and director of athletics, as well as a new basketball staff.

On October 15, 1997, the head coach was transferred to a new position of assistant athletics director and was assigned new responsibilities. Although the head coach was requested to report to his new position on November 3, 1997, he did not do so.

On October 6, 1997, one involved student-athlete was suspended indefinitely from the men's basketball team. On October 14, 1997, he withdrew from New Mexico State.

On October 23, 1997, the assistant who formerly was a junior college coach had his employment terminated by the new director of athletics effective October 31, 1997. On December 23, 1997, the individual filed suit against New Mexico State's Board of Regents and the new director of athletics. The assistant's lawsuit is still pending.

New written employment contracts were developed for all head and assistant coaches. The employment contracts include provisions involving compliance with NCAA legislation.

The university self-imposed a ban on postseason play in men's basketball for 2001. Grants-in-aid for men's basketball will be reduced by one (from 13 to 12) for 2001-02, by two (from 13 to 11) for 2002-03 and by one (from 13 to 12) for 2003-04.

No junior college prospects will be signed for admission in 2002-03.

Official visits will be reduced from 12 to eight for two years beginning in 2001-02.

In-person recruiting contacts will be reduced from five to four for two years beginning in 2001-02.

The number of evaluations will be reduced 25 percent from the maximum allowed for two years beginning in 2001-02.

The committee said it was concerned about the similarity of violations between this case and the one in 1996. However, members said they were confident the university's current leadership has a new commitment to NCAA rules compliance. The committee imposed the following additional penalties:

Public reprimand and censure.

Four years of probation beginning June 20, 2001.

In addition to the institution's self-imposed reduction of official paid visits from 12 to eight for the 2001-02 and 2002-03 academic years, the university will also reduce official paid visits in men's basketball from 12 to eight for the 2003-04 academic year.

During the probationary period, the university will continue to develop and implement a comprehensive education program on NCAA legislation and submit periodic reports to the NCAA. At the end of the probationary period, the university's president will provide a letter to the committee affirming that the university's current athletics policies and practices conform to all requirements of NCAA regulations.

As required by NCAA legislation for any institution involved in a major infractions case, New Mexico State is subject to the NCAA's repeat-violator provisions for a five-year period beginning on the effective date of the penalties in this case, which is June 20, 2001.

The members of the Division I Committee on Infractions who heard this case are: Jack Friedenthal, committee chair and professor of law, George Washington University; Richard J. Dunn, professor of English, University of Washington; Gene A. Marsh, professor of law, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa; Andrea Myers, athletics director at Indiana State University; Josephine Potuto, professor of law, University of Nebraska, Lincoln; and Thomas E. Yeager, commissioner, Colonial Athletic Association.

A copy of the complete report from the Division I Committee on Infractions is available on NCAA Online at www.ncaa.org.