The NCAA Division I Infractions Appeals Committee has upheld findings of violations and a five-year show-cause penalty for the former assistant men’s basketball coach at Long Beach State University.

Under this show-cause penalty, should the former assistant coach seek athletically related employment with any NCAA institution during that time, the individual and the hiring institution must appear before the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions to determine whether his duties should be limited.

In March 2008, the Committee on Infractions issued an infractions report that included findings of violations in the men’s basketball program for Long Beach State. The case centered on violations of NCAA rules regarding offers and inducements; extra benefits and telephone contact; and unethical conduct by the former assistant coach. The Committee on Infractions found that the former assistant coach paid for or arranged payment for expenses related to coursework for six student-athletes and provided impermissible transportation for one of the student-athletes. During three separate interviews, he provided false information to investigators, and he persuaded three student-athletes to provide false information during the investigation.

In his appeal, the former assistant coach asserted that the violation findings should be set aside because they are inaccurate. The former assistant coach also asserted that the show-cause penalty was excessive.

The appeal was reviewed by the Infractions Appeals Committee in July 2008. In considering the former assistant coach’s appeal, the Infractions Appeals Committee reviewed the notice of appeal, the transcript of the university’s Committee on Infractions hearing, and the submissions by the former assistant coach and the Committee on Infractions.

The Infractions Appeals Committee has the authority to overturn a determination of fact or violation finding only if:

• The Committee on Infractions’ finding is contrary to the evidence presented;

• The facts found by the committee do not constitute a violation of NCAA rules; or

• A procedural error affected the reliability of information that was used to support the findings.

The Committee on Infractions, not the Infractions Appeals Committee, determines the credibility of the evidence.

In affirming the violations and penalties, the Infractions Appeals Committee found “no basis to conclude that any finding was clearly contrary to the evidence or that the penalty imposed was excessive or inappropriate.”

The members of the Infractions Appeals Committee who heard this case were: Christopher L. Griffin, Foley & Lardner LLP, chair; Susan Cross Lipnickey, Miami University (Ohio); Noel M. Ragsdale, University of Southern California; David Williams II, Vanderbilt University; and Allan A. Ryan Jr., Harvard University.