District Wins Right to Move Violent Student With Autism to Safer Placement

What Happened

Student is a 17-year-old with autism-like behaviors who was placed in a Special Day Class (SDC) at Sunny Hills High School beginning in October 2006, following a settlement agreement. Within weeks of enrolling, staff discovered a coded note in which Student had written that he could set the building on fire. Over the following months, Student engaged in a serious and escalating pattern of violent behavior: throwing desks, punching and kicking aides, biting staff, flooding bathrooms, jumping on the hoods of parked cars and shattering a windshield, grabbing a school-wide PA microphone and yelling obscenities, and on one occasion threatening to "fucking kill" a staff member. Despite multiple IEP meetings and offers to move Student to an alternative placement at the Costa Mesa High School Annex, Parents refused to consent, preferring that Student remain at Sunny Hills or be home-schooled.

The District filed an expedited due process hearing in April 2007, asking an ALJ to authorize moving Student to the Annex — a county-run program for students with moderate to severe disabilities and significant behavioral needs — for up to 45 school days. Parents opposed the move, citing a prior incident in 2005 in which Student said he was injured at the Annex and had since developed anxiety about returning. They also argued that home schooling was a better alternative.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ found overwhelmingly in the district's favor. The evidence established that Student's behavior at Sunny Hills was escalating in frequency and severity, that staff and other students had been placed at serious risk of injury on multiple occasions, and that the current placement was substantially likely to result in injury to Student or to others. The district's experts — including an independent neuropsychologist who personally observed Student and visited the Annex — testified that Sunny Hills' open campus made it impossible to control the triggers for Student's outbursts, and that the risk of serious injury was high and growing.

The ALJ also rejected the Parents' preferred alternative of home schooling. Evidence showed that when Student was previously home-schooled from 2005 to 2006, he had violent outbursts during sessions, threatened the home school teacher on multiple occasions by placing his fists on her chin and arm, and caused her to stop coming out of fear for her safety. The ALJ found home schooling was not appropriate given this history.

The Parents' expert witness, who had observed the Annex for only about one hour and had not conducted a full functional analysis assessment, was found less credible than the district's witnesses. The ALJ noted that the district's SELPA coordinator was more knowledgeable about Student's unique needs and that his opinions were corroborated by other witnesses.

The Annex was found appropriate because it offered a 3-to-1 student-to-staff ratio, teachers credentialed for moderate-to-severe disabilities, staff trained in behavioral de-escalation and crisis response (B.A.S.I.C. program), a full-time on-site psychologist as behavioral case manager, weekly program reviews, and a structured environment designed to reduce behavioral triggers.

What Was Ordered

1. The District was authorized to change Student's placement to the Costa Mesa High School Annex for a period not to exceed 45 school days.
2. The student's request to remain at Sunny Hills was denied.
3. The student's request for home schooling as an alternative was denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Districts can override parental placement preferences when safety is at serious risk. Under federal law (IDEA), a school district can seek an expedited hearing to move a student to an Interim Alternative Educational Setting (IAES) for up to 45 days if there is substantial likelihood of injury — even without a parent's consent. This is one of the few situations where a district can act without parental agreement.

2. A pattern of escalating behavior is powerful evidence against parents at these hearings. The district documented each incident carefully in daily logs, IEP meeting notes, and staff testimony. Parents should understand that detailed school records of behavioral incidents can and will be used as evidence in favor of a placement change. If you disagree with incident reports, respond in writing at the time.

3. Home schooling is not automatically a safe fallback option. If a student has a history of behavioral problems during home instruction, the ALJ will consider that history when evaluating whether home schooling is a viable alternative. Past incidents at home are admissible and relevant.

4. If you hire an expert to oppose a district placement, make sure they do a thorough evaluation. The Parents' expert in this case observed the proposed placement for only one hour, did not conduct a full functional analysis, and did not review all of Student's records. The ALJ found her less credible as a result. A well-prepared, thorough independent evaluation carries far more weight.

5. Anxiety about a past placement is not enough, on its own, to block a return. Parents raised legitimate concerns about a prior injury at the Annex, but the ALJ found the evidence insufficient to outweigh the risk of serious injury at the current placement. If you have concerns about a specific placement's safety record, document them with medical records, incident reports, or other concrete evidence.