• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

constitutional rights on a high school campus

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

justalayman

Senior Member
I am still waiting for support of a police search of a student.

the linked post had did nothing to speak to the police and the allowed actions.

and no, the gun situation is not proper as the gun situation would allow the police to engage in at minimum a terry frisk on an adult. It does not speak to the possibility of the police searching a student barring an exigent circumstance and absent of a warrant.

If you got a few of those cases, I'll listen but until then, you are barking up the wrong tree. All of the cases in the link did not deal with police but administrators actions.
 


quincy

Senior Member
Check out:
Russell v. State, 74 S.W. 3d 887, Texas
People v. Dilworth, Illinois
State v. D.S., Florida
Commonwealth v. J.B., Pennsylvania
Coronado v. State, Texas
Wilcher v. State, Texas
Myers v. State, Indiana

Geez, you are tough to please, justalayman. :)
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
California

Does the right to privacy hold true on a public high school campus? Can a police officer search a student, without consent, if the student has not been arrested?

Thanks.
With good cause, sure. And there is a diminished threshold of privacy on a school campus due to a series of court rulings over the years.

But, as with any 4th Amendment issue, it depends on the details.

can the officer randomly approach a student and search them? No. But, can the officer search a student for which there is good cause to believe is in possession of contraband or weapons? More than likely, sure.

- Carl
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
I don't ever remember reading in the constitution anything about rights ripening with age. A cop searching without warrant or PC? I don;t think so.
You're kidding ... right?

A search of a person CAN be conducted without a warrant or PC - it requires articulable cause, however. Read Terry v. Ohio for one such case.

- Carl
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
from everything I have read, the exigence that allows school staff to engage in such a search is not extended to the police.
You aren't reading the right sources.

From the CA Attorney General:


When it comes to schools and students, the standards for legal searches and seizures are different, namely, more relaxed, because students in this state have a right to safe and secure campuses. (Cal. Const., art. I, sec. 28, subd. (c).)

Thus, regarding searches of students and their belongings, generally, the United States Supreme Court has held that although searches by school officials still must be "reasonable" (considering the offense, age of suspect, extent of intrusion, scope, etc.) and "justified at the inception," they do not need to be supported by "probable cause" or a search warrant. (New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) 469 U.S. 325.) A search of a student, his belongings, or his locker by public school officials requires only "reasonable suspicion" that the search will uncover evidence of a crime or a violation of a school rule. (Lisa G. (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 801; Cody S. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 86, 91-92; see William G.(1985) 40 Cal.3d 550; Corey L. (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 1020; Bobby B. (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 377; Robert B. (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 763.) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has even upheld a visual strip search of a student for prohibited narcotics. (Redding (9th Cir. 2007) 504 F.3d 828.)

The reasonable suspicion standard applies to a sworn police officer working on campus as a school resource officer. (William V. (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 1464, 1469.)

Also note that such a search can be conducted by the police at the request of a police officer who is NOT the SRO based upon the above circumstances. So, if the school official on a campus without a SRO detains a student and asks for an officer to come conduct the search, then that search is also likely to be covered in most circumstances.

- Carl
 
Last edited:

justalayman

Senior Member
You're kidding ... right?

A search of a person CAN be conducted without a warrant or PC - it requires articulable cause, however. Read Terry v. Ohio for one such case.

- Carl
the statement was very incomplete and was intended to reference a full search rather that a terry pat. The op's post:

Can a police officer search a student, without consent, if the student has not been arrested?
I jumped to the conclusion of an actual body search rather than a terry pat search due to the tenor of the question as I percieved it.
and to quincy; yes, I am and since Carl posted this:

can the officer randomly approach a student and search them? No. But, can the officer search a student for which there is good cause to believe is in possession of contraband or weapons? More than likely, sure.
that would make the "sometimes" answer correct.

I feel vindicated but I will read the cites you have provided.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
You aren't reading the right sources.

From the CA Attorney General:


When it comes to schools and students, the standards for legal searches and seizures are different, namely, more relaxed, because students in this state have a right to safe and secure campuses. (Cal. Const., art. I, sec. 28, subd. (c).)

Thus, regarding searches of students and their belongings, generally, the United States Supreme Court has held that although searches by school officials still must be "reasonable" (considering the offense, age of suspect, extent of intrusion, scope, etc.) and "justified at the inception," they do not need to be supported by "probable cause" or a search warrant. (New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) 469 U.S. 325.) A search of a student, his belongings, or his locker by public school officials requires only "reasonable suspicion" that the search will uncover evidence of a crime or a violation of a school rule. (Lisa G. (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 801; Cody S. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 86, 91-92; see William G.(1985) 40 Cal.3d 550; Corey L. (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 1020; Bobby B. (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 377; Robert B. (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 763.) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has even upheld a visual strip search of a student for prohibited narcotics. (Redding (9th Cir. 2007) 504 F.3d 828.)

The reasonable suspicion standard applies to a sworn police officer working on campus as a school resource officer. (William V. (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 1464, 1469.)

Also note that such a search can be conducted by the police at the request of a police officer who is NOT the SRO based upon the above circumstances. So, if the school official on a campus without a SRO detains a student and asks for an officer to come conduct the search, then that search is also likely to be covered in most circumstances.

- Carl
Ok, I have to go for now but I will be back. First I have to read quincy's references and then a bit of research and whatever it is my wife want me to do right now but I will be back.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Ok, I have to go for now but I will be back. First I have to read quincy's references and then a bit of research and whatever it is my wife want me to do right now but I will be back.
Note that this is an area of law that I specialize in as I was a School resource Officer and a juvenile crimes investigator, and recently an instructor in juvenile crime related laws at the academy.

Unless the search was random and capricious, it was likely lawful. While the police may not be able to conduct a similar search on the street, they CAN often conduct a more intrusive search on campus with a greatly diminished level of cause than they would need on the street. It is well settled law in CA.

And your initial reply, as I recall, was that the search was NOT lawful absent a warrant or an arrest and that is just not correct.

- Carl
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Note that this is an area of law that I specialize in as I was a School resource Officer and a juvenile crimes investigator, and recently an instructor in juvenile crime related laws at the academy.

Unless the search was random and capricious, it was likely lawful. While the police may not be able to conduct a similar search on the street, they CAN often conduct a more intrusive search on campus with a greatly diminished level of cause than they would need on the street. It is well settled law in CA.

And your initial reply, as I recall, was that the search was NOT lawful absent a warrant or an arrest and that is just not correct.

- Carl
I restated that later on in the thread.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
russel v. state; the intitial search was a terry pat which was allowed due to the circumstances based upon reasonable suspicion. It would have been allowed on an adult based upon those same reasons.

your arguement failed. next case.

here is an excerpt from a case as they cited dilworth:

Decisions filed after T.L.O. that involve police officers in school settings can generally be grouped into three categories: (1) those where school officials initiate a search or where police involvement is minimal, (2) those involving school police or liaison officers acting on their own authority, and (3) those where outside police officers initiate a search. Where school officials initiate the search or police involvement is minimal, most courts have held that the reasonable suspicion test obtains. The same is true in cases involving school police or liaison officers acting on their own authority. However, where outside police officers initiate a search, or where school officials act at the behest of law enforcement agencies, the probable cause [FN2] standard has been applied.
if I read that correctly, they state that if an officer is acting in an official capacity as an officer, probable cause is required.

I can't seem to find the actual text of the case.


this is from the state AG Florida:
II. Student Searches by Law Enforcement Officers

Any law enforcement officer -- stationed on campus or off campus -- may conduct a student search for weapons on school property based on the reasonable suspicion of a school official.(10) The courts recognize that school officials should not hesitate to contact law enforcement authorities when a student is suspected of having a weapon on school grounds;(11) good common sense as well as good public policy dictate that law enforcement officers trained in disarming offenders, not school officials, should conduct searches for weapons.

Except for searches for weapons, law enforcement officers stationed on school grounds will generally need probable cause to conduct a search of a student or a student's possessions, including a motor vehicle. If a law enforcement officer has been summoned to a school to assist school officials in an investigation (not related to suspected weapons) and a student search is warranted based on the school official's reasonable suspicion, it is recommended that school officials -- not the officer -- initiate, conduct and witness the search. The officer can stand by as a non-participant until the search is completed.
I don't think you win with Florida either.

without going through each of these, I find disparity amongst the various states and the requirements for a search and what rights a student has.

I will leave it at in most cases, it does appear that reasonable cause is required to allow a search. In many situations, a police officer is held to a higher standard than school authorities even to the extent that PC is required in some states.

So, I stand by my "sometimes" answer as I believe I have proven that point.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
I will leave it at in most cases, it does appear that reasonable cause is required to allow a search. In many situations, a police officer is held to a higher standard than school authorities even to the extent that PC is required in some states.

So, I stand by my "sometimes" answer as I believe I have proven that point.
Since we are dealing with a question concerning CA law, the search is almost certainly going to be lawful if done on campus and either at the request of school officials or conducted by the SRO who is effectively a school official pursuant to law. And, since in 18 years, I have yet to ever find an instance where an officer just wanders onto a campus to conduct routine patrol, I suspect there was good cause. In fact, most officers avoid schools like the plague because juvenile law is a whole different animal than adult law, and most officers run away screaming when they have to deal with juveniles unless the kid has committed a clearly articulable felony.

Combine that with the status of the law in most every state and certainly in CA that allows for a more relaxed standard of reasonable suspicion and you come back to a high likelihood that she search is good.

Yes, it's still "sometimes", but to be more precise the answer would be that the search is USUALLY or ALMOST ALWAYS lawful.

(Note: Where is this Rusell case from - I found a few from CA but none that are on this issue, and none that are cited to support any federal decisions ... )

- Carl
 
Last edited:

quincy

Senior Member
Carl, Google "Russell v. State, 74 S.W. 3d 887" and the first thing that comes up is "Body", with the body of the text for the case. The decision was that a police officer could search a student without a warrant OR probable cause - this particular student had baggy pants and refused teachers' requests to empty his pockets so the officer searched him.

As for my answer of "yes" to the original question asked here, "yes" is still a proper response to a question starting with "can". A officer may not always be allowed to conduct such a search, but an officer can conduct one (given the proper circumstances). ;)
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Carl, Google "Russell v. State, 74 S.W. 3d 887" and the first thing that comes up is "Body", with the body of the text for the case. The decision was that a police officer could search a student without a warrant OR probable cause - this particular student had baggy pants and refused teachers' requests to empty his pockets so the officer searched him.

As for my answer of "yes" to the original question asked here, "yes" is still a proper response to a question starting with "can". A officer may not always be allowed to conduct such a search, but an officer can conduct one (given the proper circumstances). ;)
the initial search was a terry pat though and with articulable reason. It was initially performed due to a reasonable suspicion of a weapon and the drugs were then found. While I believe the courts opnion was a bit incorrect when they stated:
PROPRIETY OF SEARCH

Russell argues in his sole issue that the court abused its discretion by denying his suppression motion because Officer Lee did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct a pat-down search. The State responds that reasonable suspicion was not required because this was a school search.
I do not believe the fact it was a school search was even required to make the determination as I stated above.

Please take not of this:

In New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourth Amendment applies to the search of a student by a school official.
wgich is followed immediately by this statement:

The Court observed that such a search must satisfy a "twofold inquiry" to pass constitutional muster: "first, one must consider 'whether the ... action was justified at its inception'; second, one must determine whether the search as actually conducted 'was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.' " Id. at 341, 105 S.Ct. at 742-43, 83 L.Ed.2d at 734 (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 20, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1879, 20 L.Ed.2d 889, 905 (1968)) (internal citation omitted).

The Court established the following general test for determining whether a school search is "reasonable" for Fourth Amendment purposes:

Under ordinary circumstances, a search of a student by a teacher or other 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. Such 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.

Id. at 341-42, 105 S.Ct. at 743, 83 L.Ed.2d at 734-35 (footnotes omitted).

The Court expressly left unanswered the issue of what standard should apply to a school search in which a law enforcement official is involved. Id. at 341 n. 7, 105 S.Ct. at 743 n. 7, 83 L.Ed.2d at 735 n. 7.
it does note that later decisions have made concluded that:

(3) those where outside police officers initiate a search. Where school officials initiate the search or police involvement is minimal, most courts have held that the reasonable suspicion test obtains. The same is true in cases involving school police or liaison officers acting on their own authority. However, where outside police officers initiate a search, or where school officials act at the behest of law enforcement agencies, the probable cause [FN2] standard has been applied.
So, if this were not California, the next proper question would be "was the officer acting in an official capacity as a LEO"






Carl: Since we are dealing with a question concerning CA law,
DAMN!!!! I missed (ignored?) that. Sorry guys. I concede.

As for my answer of "yes" to the original question asked here, "yes" is still a proper response to a question starting with "can". A officer may not always be allowed to conduct such a search, but an officer can conduct one (given the proper circumstances).
but "sometimes" also fits the bill. It's just like shooting somebody. I "can" shoot somebody anytime but "sometimes" I can do it legally.:D
 

quincy

Senior Member
Justalayman, since you so graciously conceded (finally:)) on the main issue here, I will agree with you that "sometimes" isn't that bad of an answer either. :D
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top