A San Diego State University student or employee who receives a formal notice of a Title IX or sexual misconduct complaint needs immediate guidance from an experienced SDSU Title IX lawyer. The university’s disciplinary process runs on its own institutional timeline, governed by three overlapping layers of authority: federal Title IX regulations under 20 U.S.C. § 1681 and 34 C.F.R. Part 106, California’s affirmative consent law under California Education Code § 67386 (Senate Bill 967), and the Interim CSU Nondiscrimination Policy (effective March 4, 2025) and its CSU systemwide student procedures. If you are searching for a Title 9 lawyer for a SDSU case, this guide explains what to expect from the moment a complaint is filed through the final appeal deadline.
The administrative office that receives and investigates Title IX matters at SDSU is the SDSU Center for Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (Title IX), accessible at titleix.sdsu.edu. Student discipline and sanctions flow through the SDSU Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities.
California's Statutory Framework for Title IX Proceedings
Understanding a SDSU Title IX case requires grasping three distinct legal layers.
Layer 1: Federal law
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1681, prohibits sex discrimination in any educational program receiving federal financial assistance. The implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 106 set grievance-procedure and notice requirements. Which hearing and questioning rules apply depends on the CSU track: the federal-mandated hearing process (Track 1) uses a live hearing with advisor-conducted questioning, while other cases proceed under the Track 2 hearing process or a non-hearing investigator determination with different questioning rules, as described below.
Layer 2: California state law
California Education Code § 67386, enacted under Senate Bill 967 and reinforced by SB 493, imposes an affirmative consent standard on California postsecondary institutions. Consent must be affirmative, conscious, voluntary, and ongoing. California Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5 also provides a post-exhaustion judicial review pathway in California Superior Court.
Layer 3: Interim CSU Nondiscrimination Policy
SDSU operates under the Interim CSU Nondiscrimination Policy (effective March 4, 2025) and its student procedures, including the federal-mandated hearing process (Track 1) and the Track 2 hearing process. The procedures define prohibited conduct, set procedural timelines, assign investigator roles, and specify the sanctioning authority. All SDSU cases use a preponderance of the evidence standard.
The SDSU Title IX Process: Step by Step
1. Intake and Notice of Allegations
When a complaint is filed with SDSU’s Title IX office, the Title IX Coordinator determines whether it falls within scope. If it does, the university issues a written Notice of Allegations to the respondent including the conduct alleged, the date and location, and a statement that the respondent is presumed not responsible unless determined otherwise.
2. Factual Investigation and the 10-Working-Day Evidence Review Window
A trained investigator interviews the complainant, the respondent, and witnesses, and collects all relevant evidence. Under federal regulations and CSU systemwide DHR framework policy, both parties receive 10 Working Days to review the preliminary investigation report with the relevant evidence gathered (other evidence offered by the parties is available on request) and submit a written response before the investigative report is finalized. This window is one of the most tactically important stages in the entire process.
3. The Investigative Report and Pre-Hearing Conference
After the evidence inspection period closes, the investigator finalizes the Investigative Report, which is provided to both parties. A pre-hearing conference may follow to resolve procedural questions.
4. Hearings and Questioning Rules
SDSU cases that go to hearing are decided by a single neutral Hearing Officer, not a panel. Some cases are resolved without a hearing, with the investigator making the determination. In the federal-mandated hearing process (Track 1), each party needs a hearing advisor to ask questions of the other party and witnesses, and the university provides one if a party does not have one. In the Track 2 hearing process, advisors and support persons may observe and consult but do not speak on the substance or process of the hearing; the Hearing Officer asks the questions, and parties submit proposed questions 5 Working Days before the hearing. The respondent and complainant cannot question each other directly.
Questioning at the hearing is the respondent’s primary opportunity to challenge the credibility of the complainant’s testimony. An experienced SDSU Title IX lawyer will prepare a questioning strategy grounded in the investigative report and evidence file.
5. Sanctions
If the respondent is found responsible, sanctions can include suspension and expulsion under the applicable student conduct procedures. Interim protective steps during a case, such as an interim suspension, are separate from sanctions imposed after a finding. Specific consequences such as transcript notation, degree withholding, or loss of housing or employment should be confirmed against the currently posted procedures before being assumed.
6. The 10-Working-Day Appeal Window
Either party may appeal to the CSU Chancellor’s Office Civil Rights Appeals Unit no later than 10 Working Days after the Notice of Investigation Outcome (non-hearing cases) or Final Decision (hearing cases). The appeal is limited to 3,500 words plus exhibits, and any response is due within 10 Working Days of notice of the appeal. Appeal grounds are limited to: (1) no reasonable basis for the findings or conclusions; (2) procedural errors that would likely have changed the outcome; (3) new evidence, not reasonably available earlier, that would change the outcome; (4) conflict of interest or bias by the coordinator, investigator, or Hearing Officer; and (5) sanctions that are objectively unreasonable or arbitrary based on the substantiated conduct. Confirm the currently posted CSU procedures before filing, since procedures can be revised.
7. Judicial Review: CCP § 1094.5 Writ of Administrative Mandamus
After exhausting internal appeals, a respondent may petition for a Writ of Administrative Mandamus in California Superior Court under California Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5. The court reviews whether the university’s procedures were followed and whether substantial evidence supports the finding.
How an SDSU Title IX Lawyer Evaluates Your Case
SDSU cases follow the Interim CSU Nondiscrimination Policy (effective March 4, 2025), with a trained investigator model and hearings decided by a single Hearing Officer. An SDSU Title IX lawyer will review the allegations in the Notice, assess what evidence the university is likely to gather, and help you decide what to say, and what not to say, before investigators make contact.
The most common mistake respondents make at SDSU is treating the investigator as neutral. The investigator is a trained fact-finder employed by the institution. Your advisor is the only person at the table whose job is to protect your interests.
If the Hearing Officer finds you responsible, the appeal window is 10 Working Days after the notice of the Final Decision. San Diego courts also retain jurisdiction for CCP § 1094.5 review after internal remedies are exhausted.
SDSU's Title IX Office and Student Conduct
The university office responsible for Title IX matters at SDSU is the SDSU Center for Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (Title IX) (titleix.sdsu.edu). Student discipline and sanctions are administered by the SDSU Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. These are institutional offices. Their staff are not your representatives.
Choosing a SDSU Title IX Defense Advisor
Under 34 C.F.R. § 106.45, you have the right to an advisor of your choice throughout the entire grievance process. That includes an attorney. Your advisor can sit with you in any meeting with university officials, help you review and respond to the evidence file, handle questioning through the permitted hearing procedure (advisor questioning in Track 1 cases and proposed questions to the Hearing Officer in Track 2 cases), and draft your written appeal.
In federal-mandated (Track 1) hearing cases, the university will provide a hearing advisor to ask questions if you do not have one, but that advisor’s role is limited to asking questions, not to preparing your defense.
For California-wide context on Title IX defense, see our California Title IX defense attorney guide. The Title IX investigation guide covers each stage in detail.
Official SDSU Title IX Resources
- SDSU Center for Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (Title IX)
- Applicable policy: Interim CSU Nondiscrimination Policy (effective March 4, 2025)
- Student Code of Conduct: SDSU Student Code of Conduct
Last verified: September 2026
Frequently Asked Questions About SDSU Title IX Cases
What is a SDSU Title IX lawyer, and do I need one?
An SDSU Title IX lawyer is an attorney specializing in advising students and employees facing Title IX complaints at San Diego State University. Given the severity of potential sanctions, including suspension and expulsion, experienced legal counsel is essential.
Can I use a Title 9 lawyer for a SDSU case even if it is also under criminal investigation?
Yes. A Title 9 lawyer can represent you in both the university’s administrative proceeding and in a parallel criminal matter. Statements made in the university proceeding can be used in a criminal investigation, making early legal advice critical.
How long does a SDSU Title IX investigation typically take?
Cases commonly take several months from the initial complaint to the final hearing outcome, though complex cases may extend longer.
What is the affirmative consent standard under California Education Code § 67386?
California law requires that consent to sexual activity be affirmative, conscious, voluntary, and ongoing throughout the encounter. Lack of protest or resistance does not constitute consent.
Can I bring an attorney to my investigator interview at SDSU?
Yes. Your advisor, including an attorney, may accompany you to any meeting or interview during the grievance process. During investigator interviews, the party typically speaks; the advisor consults but does not speak on your behalf at that stage.
What are the grounds for appealing a SDSU Title IX finding?
Appeals to the CSU Chancellor’s Office Civil Rights Appeals Unit must be submitted no later than 10 Working Days after the Notice of Investigation Outcome (non-hearing cases) or Final Decision (hearing cases). Appeal grounds are limited to: (1) no reasonable basis for the findings; (2) procedural errors that would likely have changed the outcome; (3) new evidence that would change the outcome and was not reasonably available earlier; (4) conflict of interest or bias; and (5) objectively unreasonable or arbitrary sanctions.
Can the SDSU decision be reviewed in court?
Yes. Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5, a party who has exhausted all internal appeals may petition a California Superior Court for a Writ of Administrative Mandamus.
What evidence should I preserve after receiving a SDSU Notice of Allegations?
Preserve all text messages, emails, social media messages, photos, videos, receipts, witness contact information, and any other records related to the alleged incident and your interactions with the complainant. Preserving this evidence before an investigator interviews you is essential.
I just received a Notice of Allegations from SDSU. What should I do first?
Do not respond to investigators without consulting a SDSU Title IX lawyer first. Do not contact the complainant or witnesses. Preserve all communications and evidence. Contact an experienced Title IX defense attorney as soon as possible.
Disclaimer: This resource is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or establish an attorney-client relationship. SDSU is not affiliated with this publication.
