The NCAA Division I Infractions Appeals Committee upheld findings of violations and associated penalties for the former head men’s basketball coach at Indiana University, Bloomington.

In November 2008, the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions issued a report for findings of violations in the men’s basketball program for Indiana. The case included violations of NCAA rules regarding impermissible telephone contacts and unethical conduct involving the former head coach.

The Committee on Infractions case included multiple telephone recruiting restrictions and violations of sanctions self-imposed on the university from when it hired the former head coach and adopted his previous penalties as its own. The violations in this appeals case included at least 16 prohibited three-way calls with seven prospective student-athletes.

The former head coach also appealed the unethical conduct and failure-to-monitor charges against him. Specifically, the former head coach received a five-year show-cause order, which outlined how the former coach’s recruiting and other coaching duties must be limited at any future employing NCAA institutions. Those limitations are further detailed in the public report.

In his appeal, the former head coach asserted that the findings of violations should be set aside as clearly contrary to the evidence presented to the Committee on Infractions and affected by a procedural error. Regarding this alleged procedural error, the former head coach claimed that the Committee on Infractions may not determine a hearing date before receiving the notice of allegations affirming that the staff has charged violations. He also appealed the five-year show cause order and its conditions, stating that it should be set aside as excessive.

In affirming the violations and penalties, the Infractions Appeals Committee stated in its report that it found no basis on which to conclude that the finding of violations was contrary to the evidence. The Infractions Appeals Committee also stated that it did not find any basis on which to conclude that the length of the show cause order was excessive such that it constituted an abuse of discretion by the Committee on Infractions. Finally, it noted that NCAA rules do not address when the Committee on Infractions may schedule the hearing of a particular case, and therefore found no procedural error.

In considering the former head 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 head coach and the Committee on Infractions.

The Infractions Appeals Committee may 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 there was a procedural error and, but for the error, the Committee on Infractions would not have made the finding of violation. A penalty by the Committee on Infractions may be set aside on appeal if the penalty is “excessive such that it constitutes an abuse of discretion.”

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. Ryan is a former member of the committee who participated in this case due to the recusal of Jack Friedenthal, George Washington University.