Minnesota Transitions

Charter School

Search / Seizures
& Student Rights

 The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the

notion that each mans home is his castle, secure
from unreasonable searches and seizures of
property by the government. It protects against
arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law
regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety
inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of
surveillance, as well as being central to many other
criminal law topics and to privacy law.
Amendment IV

Does this apply to school? How so?

Fourth Amendment. (n.d.) Legal
Information Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitutio
n/fourth_amendment

Case Study: New Jersey vs. T.L.O. 1985

A teacher at a New Jersey high school, upon discovering respondent, then a 14-year-old
freshman, and her companion smoking cigarettes in a school lavatory in violation of a school
rule, took them to the Principal's office, where they met with the Assistant Vice Principal. When
respondent, in response to the Assistant Vice Principal's questioning, denied that she had been
smoking and claimed that she did not smoke at all, the Assistant Vice Principal demanded to
see her purse. Upon opening the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes and also noticed a
package of cigarette rolling papers that are commonly associated with the use of marihuana.
He then proceeded to search the purse thoroughly and found some marijuana, a pipe, plastic
bags, a fairly substantial amount of money, an index card containing a list of students who
owed respondent money, and two letters that implicated her in marijuana dealing.

As an administrator, what are your views

on this scenario? Was the Vice Principal
justified in his search?
What would you have done differently?
Why?
How does this relate to the fourth
amendment?

New Jersey v.s. T.L.O. (n.d.) Legal

Information Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremeco
urt/text/469/325

Thereafter, the State brought delinquency charges against respondent in the

Juvenile Court, which, after denying respondent's motion to suppress the evidence
found in her purse, held that the Fourth Amendment applied to searches by school
officials, but that the search in question was a reasonable one, and adjudged
respondent to be a delinquent. The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior
Court affirmed the trial court's finding that there had been no Fourth Amendment
violation, but vacated the adjudication of delinquency and remanded on other
grounds. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed and ordered the
suppression of the evidence found in respondent's purse, holding that the
search of the purse was unreasonable.

Did you expect this decision? Why / Why not?

How was this search unreasonable? Why?

New Jersey v.s. T.L.O. (n.d.) Legal

Information Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremeco
urt/text/469/325

How To Determine Reasonableness:

1. There are reasonable grounds for suspecting the
search will turn up evidence that the student has violated
or is violating either the law or the rules of the school?
2. Is the scope of the search reasonable?
Courts words: The measure adopted reasonably related
to the objectives of the search and not excessively
intrusive in the light of age and sex of the students and
the nature of the infraction ?
Courts words: The measure adopted reasonably
related to the objectives of the search and not
excessively intrusive in the light of age and sex
of the students and the nature of the
infraction ?

Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,

Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Case scenario: A teacher reports to you

that a student in her class smells like
marijuana. Also, she states that another
student told her that student has
marijuana in book bag. The book bag is
not with the student and is presumed to
be in the students locker.

What is your reaction? What process/procedure would

you follow?
Considering the T.L.O. case, do you have the right to
search this locker? Why?
Would this search be considered reasonable?

-Supreme Court of Kansas

-Texas Appellate Court Case
-Pennsylvania Court Case
All cases resorted to the T.L.O. decision
Student Conduct Codes: Prior to a locker
search a student shall be notified and given an
opportunity to be present. However, where school
authorities have a reasonable suspicion a locker
contains materials that pose a threat to the
health, welfare, and safety of students in the
school, students lockers may be searched without
prior warning.
Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,
Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Example: Michigan Law states, A pupil who uses a locker that is

the property of a school district.is presumed to have no
expectation of privacy in that locker or that lockers content.
Does the student have to be notified and present during
the search? Why?
Why is there a difference between the legal right search
of a student locker and personal possession?
Consider the T.L.O. case, what if the purse was in the
students locker? Would that constitute a reasonable
search?

Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,

Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Search of Personal
Possessions

Louisiana Court Case: A high school student was caught smoking in the
bathroom. As part of the search, the student was required to remove his
shoes. Thereby revealing narcotics.

Was this search reasonable? Why?

Can administration take action for the revealed
narcotics in the shoe?

Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,

Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

New York Court Case:

A security officer decided to search a student bag
after hearing a loud metallic thud when the bag was
set down. The security officer then ran his fingers
alongside the bag and detected the outline of a gun.
Was this search considered
reasonable? Why?

Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,

Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Court Comparison: Louisiana v.s New

York
How were these cases similar / different?
Why is the search of students shoes not
reasonable suspicion?
What specific details granted specific
suspicion in the New York case?

Cell Phones
Are educators allowed to search & seize
cell phones?
Take a moment with your partner and
create a list of incidents / circumstances
that would allow for this search &
seizure.
Are school officials allowed to search a
cell phone for pictures, calls, etc.?

Pennsylvania Court Case: Christopher Klump

Student dropped his phone during the school day and it was seized by school
officials. Attempting to determine if other students were violating the policy, used
Christophers phone to call students in the phone directory, check the messages,
and hold an instant messaging conversation without identifying themselves.

What are your thoughts on the

actions of the administrators?
Were they justified in their
seizure? Search? Why?
Court ruled: School officials were
justified in taking the cell phone,
however, the scope of the search Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,
Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
was unreasonable.
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Personal Search of a
Student
Are educators allowed to search a student?
Take a moment with your partner and create a
list of incidents / circumstances that would allow
for this search
How does the fourth amendment apply to this
type of search?
The Fifth Circuit noted: The Fourth
Amendment applies with its fullest vigor
against any intrusion on the
human
body.
Fourth
Amendment. (n.d.)
Legal
Information Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitutio
n/fourth_amendment

Case Scenario: Searching

Students

A teacher reports that money has been stolen from his

bag. Before using the restroom, the teacher knew that he
had $20 in his bag before leaving the room. He states that
only Michael & James had been in his classroom during the
time the money went missing.
Is there reasonable suspicion to search the
students? Why?
According to an Alabama Supreme Court, the search
was reasonable because the boys were the only
students in the room at the time the money went
missing.
Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes,
Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha (2004)
Public School Law. One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Pearson Education, Inc.

Strip Searches
Case Study: Safford Unified School District v. Redding
With a partner, please read the case study and consider the issue.
Issue: Did school officials violate a 13-year old students Fourth Amendment
rights when they searched her bra and underwear based on reasonable
suspicion that she had brought forbidden prescription and over-the-counter
drugs to school?
With you partner, provide a rationale for the search. Did you find the
search reasonable? Why?

Considerations:
4th Amendment
New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1985
Reasonableness Determination
See attachment
Safford Unified School District.
(12/3/13) Case Brief Summary.
Retrieved from
http://www.casebriefsummary.com/saff
ord-unified-school-district-v-redding/

Safford Unified School

District v. Redding
T.L.O. established a more lenient standard of reasonable suspicion for
determining the legality of a search in the school setting. Reasonable
suspicion equates to a moderate chance of finding evidence of
wrongdoing. In light of information Wilson had received from staff and
other students, Marisas statement that the pills came from
respondent was sufficient to justify a search of respondents
backpack and outer clothing, where she could reasonably be
suspected of carrying them. However, the humiliating strip search
that necessarily exposed her breasts and pelvic area to some
degree was categorically distinct and required greater
justificationthe content of the suspicion failed to match the
degree of intrusion. There was nothing to suggest the power or
quantity of the drugs posed a real danger to students or that respondent
was carrying pills in her underwear.

Do you agree with the rationale? Why?

What are the implications of this case?

Safford Unified School District.

(12/3/13) Case Brief Summary.
Retrieved from
http://www.casebriefsummary.com/saff
ord-unified-school-district-v-redding/

Search / Seizures & Students

Rights
What did you know?
What did you want to know?
Has this presentation changed your views on students
rights? How so?
What do you plan to take away from this presentation?
With regards to your building, how will this affect your
future discipline policies in the future?

Resources:

Cambron-MCCabe, Nelda, Eckes, Suzanne, MCCarthy, Martha

(2004) Public School Law. One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey. Pearson Education, Inc.
Fourth Amendment. (n.d.) Legal Information Institute. Retrieved
from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment
New Jersey v.s. T.L.O. (n.d.) Legal Information Institute. Retrieved
from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/469/325
Safford Unified School District. (12/3/13) Case Brief Summary.
Retrieved from
http://www.casebriefsummary.com/safford-unified-school-districtv-redding
/