Wednesday, May 6, 2020
The Amendment On Searches And Seizures - 2374 Words
In two Supreme Court cases and one Court of Appeals case, the Fourth Amendmentââ¬â¢s clause on searches and seizures has been questioned in a public school setting. These cases are based on the question of what constitutes a reasonable search in a public school, as well as, what is defined as a search and how far that search and seizure can go. These cases collectively examine the exclusionary rule, the change from probable cause to reasonable suspicion, what constitutes a search and how far that search can go. In a public school setting, students rights to be free from searches and seizures differ from others, as shown in TLO v. New Jersey, Vernonia v. Acton, and Doe v. Renfrow. TLO v. New Jersey was a Supreme Court case, argued in 1984,â⬠¦show more contentâ⬠¦This evidence of drug dealing was turned over to the police and the police asked TLOââ¬â¢s mother to bring her to the police station for further questioning, which resulted in her confession of selling marijuana at the school. In the Supreme Court, TLO lost to New Jersey 6-3. The question brought to the court in this case was, did Choplickââ¬â¢s search violated TLOââ¬â¢s Fourth Amendment, and did the exclusionary rule apply to the search. In a public school, it was determined that a person can always refuse a search, there is need for reasonable suspicion for a search, as opposed to probable cause and the exclusionary rule does not apply. In TLO, the initial suspicion to search TLOââ¬â¢s purse was justified due to the suspicion that she had been smoking in the bathroom. The majority opinion, written by Byron R. White, stated, ââ¬Å"Under ordinary circumstances, a search of a student by a teacher or other school official will be ââ¬Ëjustified at its inceptionââ¬â¢ when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either law or the rules of the school.â⬠The Court ruled in favor of the school because there was a reason to believe that the defendant had broken a school rule prohibiting smoking in the restrooms. This clarification by the Court holds that even students in a public school are protected by
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.