Opinion ID: 2638876
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Cienega-Brookman Modification Transcripts

Text: ¶ 33 Whitney also asserts that the hearing officer erred in denying him a continuance so that he could obtain the Cienega-Brookman modification trial transcripts. He claims that it was necessary for him to have this transcript in order to prepare a brief for the hearing. The record shows, however, that Whitney had ample opportunity  well over two years  to obtain a copy of the aforementioned transcripts. Whitney simply failed to seek a copy of the transcripts and failed to prepare a hearing brief. The hearing officer did not abuse his discretion when he concluded that the motion was untimely.
¶ 34 Whitney contends, additionally, that the WSBA's assistant general counsel wrongly denied his request to present the Cienega-Brookman modification trial transcript to the Board for its review. ¶ 35 ELC 11.5(d) provides that [e]vidence not presented to the hearing officer or panel must not be presented to the Board. This principle is reiterated in ELC 11.12(b), which states: Evidence not presented to the hearing officer or panel cannot be considered by the Board. Here, Whitney was attempting to present material to the Board that was not presented to the hearing officer. Br. of Appellant at App. E-F. This he cannot do. We conclude, therefore, that the assistant general counsel did not err in excluding the transcripts from board review.