Strip search 1984

4 th Amendment “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.”

What does the 4 th Amendment mean? The 4 th Amendment only regulates UNREASONABLE searches. This assumes that REASONABLE searches are constitutional. REASON: there must be a balance between the government’s right to investigate crime and a person’s right to individual privacy. Mapp v. Ohio, through the 14 th Amendment bound the states. Incorporation (Due Process Clauses of 5 th and 14 th Amendments)

Exceptions: Reasonable Suspicion Exception—Reasonable suspicion allows for stops of individuals if reasonable suspicion exists that criminal activity is afoot. Consent—anyone can consent to be searched. However, consent can be taken away at anytime and the search must stop AS LONG AS THE OFFICER HAS NOT FOUND EVIDENCE OF A CRIME. Plain View—if an officer is in a place LEGALLY and finds evidence that is OBVIOIUSLY ILLEGAL; it may be seized without a warrant. Automobile exception— Hot Pursuit—Continuous, Felony Search Incident to a Legal Arrest—it must be a LEGAL arrest. (Safety) Boarder Searches--Border StopBorder Stop National Security--New

Exceptions cont. National Security Exception--"a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement" for surveillance "conducted to obtain foreign intelligence for national security purposes" and "directed against foreign powers or agents of foreign powers reasonably believed to be located outside the United States." It also concluded that the executive branch's internal safeguards render the surveillance reasonable—assuming that everyone acts in good faith and nobody makes any mistakes.”

VERY IMPORTANT LEGAL CONCEPTS!!!!!!! Exclusionary Rule—Evidence is excluded from trial and cannot be used against an accused if the evidence was procured due to an unreasonable search. “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”—any evidence found as the “fruit” of an unreasonable search is also excluded from trial. Traffic stop

NJ vs. TLO Facts: Follow the facts: Girls caught smoking by teacher. One girl admitted it and took the punishment TLO—denied. 1 ST SEARCH!!!—found cigarettes AND rolling papers Rolling papers led to a second search 2 nd SEARCH!!!—found pot, cards with names, pipe, roll of 1 dollar bills LED TO a confession at the police station

TLO Law A REASONABLE search by a school administrator is one based on REASONABLE SUSPICION Reasonable—the search has to equal the circumstances Suspicion—he needs SOME evidence to justify the search TLO got rid of the need for a WARRANT and PROBABLE CAUSE when a school official is conducting the search.

How to Answer a 4 th Amendment question!!! Do we have state action? Does the person searched have a LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY? Are we in a school or are we in the public? SCHOOL?ORPUBLIC Reasonable1. Warrant? Suspicion2. Exception? If NO—evidence out3. If NO— evidence out

Fact Pattern: Using the groups you were in yesterday….Please make a fact pattern which accentuates ONE of the steps found in the process for answering a 4 th Amendment question.

Pottowatomie vs. Earls case: State action Reasonable expectation of privacy less in schools. ALL children submit themselves to tests and physical exams before being allowed into school. Some of clubs have trips with communal undress. All groups have own rules for participation In school Intrusion is reasonable for the same reasons in Vernonia! AGAIN—SUSPICIONLESS GOVERNMENTAL CONCERN EXTREME AS IN VERNONIA

Doe vs. Renfrow A nude search of a thirteen year old child is an invasion of some magnitude and in the current case, is a violation of any known principle of human decency. The search here is not only unlawful but outrageous. Although school officials are normally granted immunity who act in good faith, we suggest that the conduct here exceeded the “bounds of reason” by two and a half country miles. Exceptions????

Commonwealth vs. Cass Locker Searches—(Not a Federal case) Is there “Reasonable Suspicion: Reasonable SearchCircumstances Some suspicion?

In Re Latasha W. Metal detectors –California court of appeals Reasonable Suspicion SearchCircumstances Some evidence?