Search and Seizure: Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

1
Search and SeizureSearching Students for the
Possession of Drugs

• Michael Shumate
• Clay Moran

2
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

• The Fourth Amendment of the United States
  Constitution requires that a search (1) be
  conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued
  upon probable cause or
• (2) be otherwise reasonable under the Fourth
  Amendment. School officials have broad authority
  to conduct searches in the public school
  environment. (Zigmund- pg1).

3
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

• With the increase in drug use among students,
  school officials have stepped up their efforts to
  ensure student safety by allowing intrusive
  searches of students. Student rights have
  diminished in recent years through various court
  findings.

4
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

• The landmark case from the United States Supreme
  Court decision in New Jersey v T.L.O., 469 U.S.
  325, 105 S.Ct 733 (1985) involves warrantless
  student searches based upon reasonable suspicion.
  
• There are three categories that cases can be
  divided into
• searches initiated and conducted by school
  officials with minimal police involvement.
• searches conducted by school.
• searches conducted by outside police officers or
  officers working independently of the school
  environment.

5
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

• The scope of the search is limited to the
  objective of the search considering the students
  age, sex, and the nature of the infraction.
• T.L.O. impacted public school student rights. The
  ruling guaranteed public school students
  constitutional protection however the cases that
  have followed T.L.O. have generally provided
  school officials greater leeway in performing
  search and seizures and have continued to limit
  student rights within the doctrine of school
  safety.

6
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Locker Searches

• A guiding principal for searches is that the more
  intrusive the search, the greater the need for
  justification.
• Some school districts conduct general searches of
  student lockers. School districts attempt to
  extinguish any reasonable expectation of privacy
  students might have in their lockers. If no
  reasonable expectation of privacy exists in the
  lockers, then no justification is needed.

7
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Locker Searches

• Often, a locker policy will state that lockers
  are subject to search by the school officials at
  any time, often without any level of suspicion.
• In April 2000 In re Patrick Y., 746 A.2d 405 (Md.
  Ct. App. 2000), it was concluded that a search of
  an eighth graders locker was reasonable because
  the government was acting as guardian and tutor,
  and the search was one that a reasonable guardian
  and tutor might undertake. In this case a
  students locker yielded a folding knife and a
  pager.

8
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Use of Dogs

• Great concern about drug use and drug possession
  in public schools has prompted administrators to
  utilize police officers to assist with searches.
  One example is the involvement of canines to
  sniff out drugs.
• In State v. Barrett, 683 So.2d 331 (La. Ct. App.
  1996), a school board drug detection team
  consisting of members of a sheriffs office
  conducted a search for drugs at a school using
  drug detection dogs.

9
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Use of Dogs

• During the search of the school parking lot, the
  dog alerted to the 18 year olds car. The student
  gave verbal consent to a search of the car, and
  the officers found a marijuana roach in the
  ashtray.
• The court found that the action of the dog
  sniffing the wallet was not a search. When the
  dog alerted on the wallet, the principal had
  cause to suspect the wallet contained drugs and
  was justified in searching the wallet without a
  warrant.

10
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Use of Dogs

• When officers decided to search the defendants
  car, they had probable cause because they had
  found 400.00 in cash, a beeper, and a book bag
  decorated with drawings of marijuana leaves.

11
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Use of Dogs

• The warrantless search of the car also was
  appropriate under the consent exception. School
  officials may search a vehicle parked on school
  premises if they have reasonable suspicion that
  the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a
  violation.
• However, searches of property are different than
  a dog sniffing an actual person. Some courts
  consider a dog sniff of an actual person a
  search under the Fourth Amendment because of
  the intrusiveness of this action. These courts,
  therefore, require at least reasonable suspicion
  to conduct a dog sniff of a student.

12
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsDrug Testing

• Drug testing through urinalysis comes under
  scrutiny of the Fourth Amendment. Such testing is
  considered an intrusive search and you must have
  strong reasonable and individualized suspicion
  that a student is a drug user.
• In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled 6-to-3 that
  random drug testing of high school athletes does
  not violate the Fourth Amendment protection
  against unreasonable search and seizure.

13
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Drug Testing

• On October 5, 1998, the high court let stand a
  7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision
  allowing an Indiana school district to randomly
  drug test all students who participate in
  extracurricular activities (Todd v. Rush County,
  No. 97-2021, 1998WL334388)

14
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsDrug Testing

• On March 22, 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court
  declined to review a U.S. Court of Appeals for
  the 7th Circuit decision in an Indiana case that
  said forcing suspended students to submit to drug
  testing before they can return to school violates
  their privacy rights.
• In that case, the 7th Circuit ruled that, unlike
  students who voluntarily chose to play sports or
  engage in extracurricular activities, a boy who
  was suspended for five days for fighting and
  refused to submit to a urine test had not
  surrendered any of his privacy rights (Anderson
  Community School Corp. v. Willis, 158 F.3d 415
  (1998))

15
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs

• A students person and/or personal effects may be
  searched by a school official whenever the
  official has reasonable suspicion to believe that
  the student has violated or is about to violate
  the law or a school rule and a search will yield
  evidence of the violation.

16
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsPat down

• A pat-down search of a student may only be
  conducted if a school administrator has
  established a high level of reasonable suspicion
  and that evidence will be found to corroborate
  suspicion that a law or school rule has been
  broken.
• A pat down search of a students person is
  conducted in private by a school official of the
  same sex and with an adult witness of the same
  sex present

17
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
Strip Searches

• Strip searches may only be used when an extreme
  situation exists requiring immediate action. Such
  a search should be used only in the event of
  imminent threat of death or great bodily injury
  to a person or persons.

18
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsStrip Searches

• When a strip search is necessary, the school
  official should contact the appropriate law
  enforcement official, and the search should be
  conducted by a sworn law enforcement officer of
  the same sex and in the presence of the same sex
  adult witness.
• School officials may only conduct a strip search
  in cases where it is necessary to avoid the
  imminent threat of death or great bodily injury
  to the student or another person

19
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsStrip Searches

• When a school official conducts a strip search,
  it must be by a same sex official with a same sex
  adult witness, and the official must have the
  prior approval of the superintendent or his
  designee, unless the health or safety of the
  student is endangered by the delay.

20
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsStrip Searches

• A search of a students person is a more serious
  intrusion into the students privacy. As a
  result, school officials should be cautious when
  conducting such a search. A strip search should
  be avoided if possible.

21
Searching Students for the Possession of
DrugsStrip Searches

• Cases that justify the strip search of students
  by school officials in public schools are
  infrequent.
• School officials may be justified in using strip
  searchs that involve weapons and drugs but the
  case must involve exigent circumstances. However,
  searching a seventh grade class of girls to
  recover 4.50 would be found unreasonable.

22
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
What we learned

• Despite Fourth Amendment guidelines, school
  officials and school police have broad authority
  to search within the public school environment.
• Two types of warrantless searches can be
  reasonable and hence legal under the Fourth
  Amendment. First, warrantless student searches
  based on individualized suspicion, and second,
  warrantless student wide searches, especially for
  weapons or drugs.

23
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
What we learned

• The cost of doing a search can be great in both
  dollars and morale. Careful analysis of the cost
  and benefits should be weighed.
• Also, school officials must consider that even
  though various courts have upheld searches it
  does not mean they should employ these methods.

24
Searching Students for the Possession of Drugs
What we learned

• In addition, it is important to note that states
  can use their respective state constitutions to
  impose greater restrictions on searches than
  allowed under federal law.