Transcript Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure

Fourth Amendment:
Searches at School
Note: Some photos and text in the PowerPoint are adapted from a lesson plan developed by Lindsey Kakert. The lesson plan is entitled “Searches
Conducted by Public School Officials” and it can be found on TWEN under the 2010 Lesson Plan Forum tab.
What IS the Fourth Amendment?
 The Fourth Amendment protects a person’s
reasonable expectations of privacy.
 The Fourth Amendment of the United States
Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and
seizures of persons or property.
Fourth 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 is a Reasonable Expectations of Privacy?
 Determining Reasonableness:
To have a reasonable expectation of privacy, one
must have both a:
 1. Subjective expectation of privacy, and;
 2. The expectation must be one that society is prepared
to recognize as legitimate. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S.
347 (1967)

- Where do you think people can reasonably expect privacy? WHY?


Home? Yard? Friend’s house? Shopping? Work or School? Public
park? Jail?
- What kinds of things can people reasonably expect to have privacy
in? WHY?

Houses? Cars? Computers? Emails? Luggage? Purses? Backpacks?
Phone conversations (cell phones)? Handwriting, photo, voice
sample?
Continuum of Certainty
 IN GENERAL, to conduct a search, a government official
must establish “probable cause” to believe that a crime
has been committed, and must obtain a warrant.
 What is PROBABLE CAUSE?






0% No Information
Hunch
Reasonable Suspicion Under Circumstances
Probable Cause
51%- Preponderance of Evidence
80-100% Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Under the Fourth Amendment, probable cause amounts to “more than
a bare suspicion but less than evidence that would justify a
conviction.”
School Searches
“Students do not shed their constitutional
rights at the schoolhouse gate.” ~Tinker v. Des
Moines Independent Community School District (1969).
The Fourth Amendment's prohibition on
unreasonable searches applies to
searches conducted by public school
officials.
How should public school officials strike a
balance between protecting a student’s
legitimate expectations of privacy and the
school’s legitimate need to maintain a safe
environment in which learning can take
place?
LESS Certainty Required for School Searches
 In a school setting, teachers or other school officials are not
required to establish “probable cause” or to obtain a search
warrant for a search to be constitutional under the Fourth
Amendment:


“Requiring a teacher to obtain a warrant before searching a child suspected of an
infraction of school rules (or of the criminal law) would unduly interfere
with the maintenance of the swift and informal disciplinary
procedures needed in the schools.”
“The accommodation of the privacy interests of schoolchildren with the
substantial need of teachers and administrators for freedom to maintain
order in the schools does not require strict adherence to the requirement that
searches be based on probable cause to believe that the subject of the search has
violated or is violating the law. Rather, the legality of a search of a student should
depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the
search.”
 A public school official must have “reasonable suspicion” to justify a
search of a student.
SO…What is a “Reasonable” School Search?
 Determining the “reasonableness” of any search involves a two-step
inquiry:


First, one must consider “whether the action was justified at its inception.”
Second, one must determine whether the search as conducted “was
reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the
interference in the first place.”
 A search of a student by a public school official will be “justified at
its inception” when there are reasonable grounds for
suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student
has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school.
 Further, a search will be permissible in its scope when the
measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives
of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and
sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.
- New Jersey v. T.L.O., (1985).
Was the Search of Betty’s Purse
Reasonable?
 Did the authorities have any “Reasonable Grounds” to search
Betty’s purse?
New Jersey v. T.L.O., (1985).
A high school student was caught smoking in the bathroom and the
Assistant Vice Principal searched the student’s purse for cigarettes.
When the search turned up rolling papers, marijuana and a list of
“people who owe me money,” the student claimed that the search of her
purse was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

 If so, was the search reasonable in scope under the circumstances?

Safford Unified School Dist. No. 1 v. Redding (2009)

A middle school student, Savana Redding, was suspected of distributing over-thecounter and prescription pain relievers to other students based on a tip by another
student. School officials conducted a strip search of Savana and did not find any
pills. Savana’s mother sued the school district for violating her daughter’s Fourth
Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches.
4th Amendment Violations
 Exclusionary Rule, Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643
(1961)
 Evidence obtained through a violation of the Fourth
Amendment is generally not admissible by the
prosecution during the defendant’s criminal trial.
- Rationale is that if police know evidence obtained in
violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used
to convict someone of a crime, they will not violate it.
The “Consent” Search
 Because Andrew gave the officer permission to look
in his wallet, Andrew cannot later claim that the
officer violated his privacy rights.
 Unless the officer coerced Andrew into giving
consent, such as using threats or force, the search is
perfectly legal even if the officer had no reason to
suspect that Andrew had committed any crime.
Drug Testing for Athletes
 Chris’s Drug Test would be allowed under current law.
 In 1995, the United States Supreme Court ruled that
public school athletes can be required to undergo drug
testing even if they are not suspected of using drugs.
 (1) Justice Scalia gave several reasons for testing student
athletes before anyone else in the student body:




1) student athletes have lesser privacy expectations because they are
accustomed to dressing and showering in locker rooms;
2) they have to get physicals, keep a minimum GPA, and comply
with the RULES of the Team;
3) Student athletes are role models to other students;
4) Drugs may be particularly dangerous for student athletes.