Student Search and Seizure

A. Fourth Amendment to U.S. Constitution

1. Protects individuals, including students, from unreasonable searches and seizures

2. Expectation of personal privacy

3. Expectation of privacy in articles of personal property

B. Reasonable Suspicion/Probable Cause

1. Police require probable cause, which is necessary for warrant

2. School officials need only reasonable suspicion (New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 1985)

a. Reasonable Suspicion:

i) Action justified at inception?

ii) Was search reasonably related in scope of circumstances, which justified search?

iii) Applicable to seizures also.

3. Individualized Suspicion:

a. Probably not required if conditions pose a serious risk of immediate harm (e.g. general search acceptable if for gun in crowd of students).

C. Joint Action (Police and School Officials)

1. The more involved police are, the higher standard of cause required for search

2. Is search for disciplinary reasons to further educational interests or quest for criminal evidence?

D. Searches of Lockers/Cars

1. Need legitimate expectation of privacy to involve protections of the Fourth Amendment

2. Lockers

a. Negate student privacy expectations by having policy which makes lockers subject to search by school officials

b. Policy states school owns lockers

c. Disseminated in writing

3. Cars

a. On school premises

b. Should have reasonable suspicion under New Jersey v. T.L.O.

E. Use of Dogs

1. School Code 105 ILCS 5/10-22.10a

a. Authorizes adoption of policy to request police to conduct "reasonable search of school grounds and lockers for illegal drugs, including searches conducted by specially trained dogs."

b. Constitutionality of this statute is questioned by some, but to date, statute has not been overturned.

F. Strip Searches

1. Unlawful absent search warrant or probable cause.

G. Random Drug Testing

1. Conflicting law as to whether constitutional

2. Common factors in cases where allowed:

a. Student athletes

b. Athletes have reduced privacy expectations

c. Voluntarily chosen to participate in program

d. Extensive testing safeguards

e. Disclosure limited to certain administrators, not for criminal use

f. Important if not compelling interest in deterring drug use

H. Metal Detectors

1. New York court held permissible

a. Advance notice that searches may occur should be provided (People v. Dukes, 580 N.Y.S. 2nd 850 (1992.))

I. Recommendation

1. District should have detailed policy in place and disseminate such to parents/students