Eliseo Lugo III

 In Weeks v. United States, 1914, the Court ruled that evidence obtained by police illegally is not admissible in federal court—a practice known as the exclusionary rule.  The Court decided that such evidence is also inadmissible in State courts in Mapp v. Ohio,  The Supreme Court extended 4th Amendment protections to include not only tangible property  Also intangible items obtained without a warrant, such as phone conversations (Katz v. United States, 1967).  However, the 4th Amendment does not apply to such items as garbage placed on a curb (California v. Greenwood, 1988)

 In 1980, a teacher at Piscataway High School in Middlesex County, New Jersey, found T.L.O. and another girl smoking in a restroom, a place that was by school rule a nonsmoking area. The two girls were taken to the principal's office where T.L.O.'s friend admitted that she had been smoking in the restroom. T.L.O. denied smoking there and to smoking at all. An assistant vice-principal demanded to see T.L.O.'s purse. Searching through it he found a pack of cigarettes. He also found rolling papers, a pipe, marijuana, a large wad of dollar bills, and two letters that indicated that T.L.O. was involved in marijuana dealing at the high school.

 Time-1985  Place-New Jersey  Violated right-search and seizure  Winner of case- New Jersey

 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

 New Jersey V. T.L.O search and seizure -This case is about a minor who was caught in a bathroom smoking by school faculty. She was brought to the principal’s office where she denied this. Faculty then searched her bag and found cigarettes.

 What-T.L.O claimed that one of her rights was violated.  When-the case was establishes in  Where- New Jersey (Piscataway)  This was an issue because T.L.O was searched under improper cause.

 T.L.O claimed that her search and seizure rights were violated because there was no probable cause for them to search her bag.  Although she denied smoking, in her bag cigarettes were found.

 T.L.O- claimed that she was not smoking in the bathroom and that her bag was searched without probable cause  New Jersey- T.L.O was caught in the bathroom smoking and that was the reason for searching.

 The jury ruled in favor for New Jersey with a vote of 6-3  The jury realized that school students have the right of the 4 th amendment however, the school faculty had probable cause.

 Justice Powell (joined by Justice O'Connor) stated that while he agreed with the Court's opinion, he felt that students in primary and secondary educational settings should not be afforded the same level of protection for search and seizures as adults and juveniles in non- school settings.Justice O'Connor

 "Today's decision sanctions school officials to conduct fullscale searches on a "reasonableness" standard whose only definite content is that it is not the same test as the "probable cause" standard found in the text of the Fourth Amendment. In adopting this unclear, unprecedented, and unnecessary departure from generally applicable Fourth Amendment standards, the Court carves out a broad exception to standards that this Court has developed over years of considering Fourth Amendment problems. Its decision is supported neither by precedent nor even by a fair application of the "balancing test of power" it proclaims in this very opinion." - Justice Brennan joined by Justice Marshall

 We are satisfied that, when a school official has reasonable grounds to believe that a student possesses evidence of illegal activity or activity that would interfere with school discipline and order, the school official has the right to conduct a reasonable search for such evidence – Supreme Court