L and L Law Group defends Texas educators in TEA investigations and SBEC certificate proceedings under 19 TAC Chapter 249.
L and L Law Group defends Texas educators in TEA investigations and SBEC certificate proceedings under 19 TAC Chapter 249. Coordinated criminal-administrative defense. Free 24/7. (214) 466-1398.
L and L Law Group is a Frisco-based criminal defense firm. Reggie London prosecuted in the Dallas County District Attorney's Office before joining the defense bar; Njeri London is the firm's managing attorney. Together they have defended thousands of cases across Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, and the surrounding DFW counties. We answer the phone at any hour because that is when most cases need defense work.
“Educator-certification cases are not criminal cases — they have different standards, different deadlines, different remedies. A favorable criminal outcome can still cost you the certificate if the SBEC defense is not running in parallel.”
“I have watched teachers win the criminal case and lose the certificate, and the reverse. The two tracks have to be defended together, by counsel who know both. Treating them as separate problems is how careers end.”
This page was written and reviewed by Njeri London, State Bar of Texas No. 24043266, and Reggie London, State Bar of Texas No. 24043514. Last reviewed: April 2026.
Texas educator certification proceedings under 19 TAC Chapter 249 are administrative, not criminal, but the consequences are real — inscribed reprimand, restriction, suspension, or revocation. When a parallel criminal case exists, the two tracks must be defended together.
Three primary pathways trigger TEA investigations: (1) mandatory school-district reports under Texas Education Code §22.0831 when a district learns of educator misconduct; (2) parent or student complaints filed directly with TEA; (3) criminal-arrest notifications through the DPS fingerprint-based background check that runs continuously on certified educators.
The investigator opens a case file and requests a written response within a specified time frame, typically 30 days. The initial response is critical. Statements made during the investigation can be used throughout the proceeding, and the framing established in that first response often determines how the case is characterized at every subsequent stage.
Under 19 TAC §249.15, SBEC can impose: inscribed reprimand (lightest, often the negotiated outcome at informal conference); restriction (specific limits on practice, often paired with monitoring); suspension with reinstatement terms; revocation; or permanent revocation (reserved for the most serious cases). Mandatory revocation under Education Code §21.058 applies automatically to certain convictions — most sex offenses involving minors, some violent felonies, and certain drug offenses.
The sanction depends on the conduct, prior disciplinary history, the educator's response, and the strength of any defense or mitigation. Most cases resolve at informal conference under §249.14 well before reaching contested hearing.
When an educator faces both a criminal case and a TEA/SBEC investigation, the two tracks must be defended together. A criminal plea structured for the criminal court may inadvertently trigger SBEC mandatory revocation. Conversely, an SBEC settlement that resolves the administrative case may include language that affects the criminal case.
L and L Law Group handles both tracks together. We coordinate the criminal defense around the SBEC implications and the SBEC defense around the criminal-case posture. The plea structure, the affirmative-finding analysis, the timing of resolution — every piece is calibrated to protect both freedom and the certificate.
TEA inquiry letter, district report under Education Code §22.0831, arrest notification, or SBEC investigation under 19 TAC Chapter 249. Each has different deadlines and procedural posture.
When a parallel criminal case exists, the two tracks must be defended together. A criminal plea can trigger SBEC sanction; an SBEC outcome can affect the criminal case. We coordinate from day one.
The first written response to TEA sets the tone for the entire investigation. Most cases resolve at informal conference under §249.14 with sanctions ranging from inscribed reprimand to remedial requirements.
When settlement is not available, we proceed to State Office of Administrative Hearings under Government Code Chapter 2001. Full evidentiary preparation: witnesses, exhibits, cross-examination.
After resolution, we confirm certificate status, assist with reporting and renewal obligations, and screen for criminal record-clearing options that affect future certification.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★“TEA opened an investigation after a student complaint that was completely fabricated. They handled the response, attended the informal conference, and the case closed without sanction. I am still teaching.”
★ ★ ★ ★ ★“My DWI triggered an SBEC review. They coordinated both cases — got the criminal reduced and the SBEC issued a remedial letter only. My certificate is intact.”
★ ★ ★ ★ ★“Contract-abandonment claim by a district. They walked me through the §249.14 process, drafted the response, and the proposed sanction was reduced from suspension to inscribed reprimand.”
Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts and applicable law.
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is the state administrative body. The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) is the certifying authority for Texas educators. Disciplinary cases under 19 TAC Chapter 249 involve both bodies.
Under Texas Education Code §22.0831, school districts must report educator arrests and certain incidents to TEA. The fingerprint-based criminal-history check at hiring also produces arrest notifications during employment.
Under 19 TAC §249.15: inscribed reprimand (lightest), restricted certification, suspension with reinstatement terms, revocation, or permanent revocation. The sanction depends on the conduct, prior history, and educator response. Most cases resolve at informal conference under §249.14.
Generally yes, unless TEA issues a suspension pending investigation (rare, typically only for the most serious allegations involving students). District-level employment decisions are separate and may differ from the certificate status.
When informal resolution fails, cases proceed to the State Office of Administrative Hearings under Texas Government Code Chapter 2001. Full evidentiary hearing with witnesses, exhibits, and a Proposal for Decision from the administrative law judge. SBEC then reviews the proposal.
Not automatically. Mandatory revocation under Education Code §21.058 applies to certain convictions (most sex offenses, violent felonies). Other convictions and even arrests trigger TEA investigation, where outcome depends on facts and defense quality.
Not without attorney review. Initial responses are critical and statements may be used throughout the proceeding. The 30-day response window feels long but disappears quickly. Consult counsel before drafting.
Yes. Final SBEC orders are appealable to Travis County District Court under the Administrative Procedure Act. Appeals are based on the administrative record and limited to legal errors; new evidence is generally not considered.
Initial inquiries typically resolve in 3 to 9 months. Contested cases proceeding to SOAH hearing can take 12 to 24 months from initiation to final order. Settlement at informal conference is the fastest resolution path.
Engagement fees vary based on the procedural posture (initial response versus informal conference versus contested hearing) and whether a parallel criminal case exists. We offer free consultations and flat-fee pricing.
Download, print, and bring to your free consultation — or fill out and email back to info@landllawgroup.com.
Available 24/7 — we respond within 60 minutes. Confidential consultation. No obligation. Se habla español. We accept payment plans.
☎ Call Now — (214) 466-1398Attorney Advertising
This website is for general information purposes only and constitutes attorney advertising under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice. This information does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Each case is unique and must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances.
L and L Law Group, PLLC attorneys are licensed in Texas. Njeri London (Texas Bar No. 24043266) is the attorney responsible for the content of this page. Reggie London (Texas Bar No. 24043514). None of the attorneys at L and L Law Group, PLLC are Board Certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization unless specifically and separately stated.
Please do not transmit confidential information by email, web form, or telephone before a written engagement is in place. Privacy Policy.
Every related charge, jurisdiction, and explainer we publish. 7 charge variants and 1 substantive articles.