See Baker v. McCollan, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S. Ct. 2689, 61 L. Ed. It is clear that the major thrust of plaintiffs' cause of action is based upon, Section 1983 requires a showing of action, "under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State or Territory". One case may point the direction. [3] In Ingraham v. Wright,430 U.S. 651, 97 S. Ct. 1401, 51 L. Ed. 1988); Bellnier v. Lund, 438 . 99 (D.Me.N.D.1969); and 4) the Fourth Amendment is applicable but the standard of determining whether the search was reasonable will be lowered to something other than probable cause. Rule 56, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment, the issue of damages to be left for trial. In United States v. Fulero, 162 U.S.App.D.C. For example in Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F.Supp.47 (N.D.N.Y. It is equally apparent that in the fulfillment of their statutorily imposed duties these school officials could and should use their human senses to detect conditions that were violative of the good order of the school. The facts indicate that a girl and her companion were discovered smoking in the school lavatory in violation of school rules. A careful reading shows that the Supreme Court did specifically hold that there must be a link between the particular item sought and a suspected infraction, New Jersey v. T. L. 0., 469 U. S. at 345. The school officials made every reasonable effort to carry off this plan in a manner compatible with proper order in the schools and with the values therein involved. The teacher of the class, defendant Reardon, stood at or near the classroom door during this time while the student teacher, defendant Olson, remained inside the classroom. Perez v. Sugarman, 499 F.2d 761 (2d Cir. These areas may be searched on a school-wide or individual basis when the school determines there is cause to conduct such a search. Moreover, granting plaintiff's prayer for injunctive relief as to the other aspects of the inspection complained of would be inconsistent with this Court's findings. Such a request is akin to a prayer for injunctive relief against a criminal act. 1977); U. S. v. Bronstein, 521 F.2d 459 (2d Cir. Brooks v. Flagg Brothers, Inc., supra. Lund boats use high end materials in their construction, like 5052 H 34 Aluminum, the most durable in the industry, precision molds and automotive paint finishes that will turn heads. We rely on donations for our financial security. Rptr. [9] This *1019 latter area also has implications in the public school context. All the animals used in the March 23, 1979 inspection were certified and trained by Little at her academy. A review of the pleadings, as supplemented by the affidavits of defendants Lund, Reardon, Parker, Butcher, and Knox, reveals that, with one minor exception which will not affect the outcome of the pending motion, there are no material issues of fact to be determined with respect to the question of defendants' liability. This Court is specifically confronted with the following issues: (1) whether the investigative procedure used by the school officials with the assistance of law enforcement officers, for the sole and exclusive purpose of furthering a valid educational goal of eliminating drug use within the school, was a seizure and search under the Fourth Amendment; (2) whether the use of dogs to detect marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia in the classroom was, standing alone, a search under the Fourth Amendment; (3) whether the admitted search of a student's clothing upon the continued alert of a trained drug detecting canine was violative of rights protected by the Fourth Amendment; and (4) whether the nude body search conducted solely upon the basis of a trained drug detecting canine's alert violated the plaintiff's right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. The pocket search was an invasion of the sphere of privacy which the Fourth Amendment protects; it was a search. In U. S. v. Chadwick,433 U.S. 1, 97 S. Ct. 2476, 53 L. Ed. It is well known that a patrol dog is endowed by nature with qualities of hearing and smell that appear to be superior to those of humans. 1971) aff'd, 30 N.Y.2d 734, 333 N.Y.S.2d 167, 284 N.E.2d 153 (1972); In re C.,26 Cal. Students were instructed to sit quietly in their seats with their hands and any purses to be placed upon their desk tops while the dog handler introduced the dog and led it up and down the desk aisles. Baltic Ind. 1977) (applying standard of "reasonable grounds" based on "articulable facts"); Moore v. Student Affairs Comm. Rptr. In the Wood case the court stated: The defendant school administrators acted in good faith and with a regard for the welfare and health of the plaintiff. This case is therefore an appropriate one for a summary judgment. Also considered as a factor in the above cited dog-sniffing cases was the absence of any normal or justifiable expectation of privacy with respect to the objects searched. In U. S. v. Solis, the 9th Circuit at 536 F.2d 882 stated: Neither does the reasoning or result in Katz v. U. S.,389 U.S. 347, 88 S. Ct. 507, 19 L. Ed. The Court is not unmindful of the dilemma which confronts school officials in a situation such as this. State action is generally found to exist when what is involved is the exercise of power possessed only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state *51 law. Business seller information Dist., 26 F.Supp.2d 1189, 1201 (D.S.D.1998); Oliver, 919 F.Supp. Patricia Little herself did not participate in any capacity other than as a volunteer dog trainer. Request a trial to view additional results. . v. NATIONAL SCREEN SERV. 2d 752 (1977). 556 (1973); U. S. v. Thomas, 1 M.J. 397 (C.M.A. Little did not suggest that a strip search procedure be implemented nor did she know that a strip search was conducted the day in question until after the inspection. It was the unauthorized and nonconsensual opening of the locker and the inspection of its interior that constituted the unlawful search, not the use of the dog. 682 (Ct. of App., 4th Dist. Both were escorted to the principal's office where the student denied smok-275. The Supreme Court of the United States has long recognized that such odors can be convincing evidence of probable cause. As a corollary to the state action rule, it is generally stated that to prove a cause of action under 1983, one need not show that the constitutional or statutory infringement complained of is supported by state law, as long as there is some nexus between the state involvement and the deprivation. 220 (1969); 2) the Fourth Amendment applies, but the Exclusionary Rule does not; United States v. Coles,302 F. Supp. Whether or not the Exclusionary Rule is coextensive with the Fourth Amendment, and hence applicable in a criminal action based upon a search such as that now in issue, is subject to considerable speculation. This Court cannot say as a matter of law that the alerting of a trained dog standing alone is sufficient to establish reasonable cause to believe a complete body search by school officials in surroundings that insure and maintain human dignity. 52. 1974). 47 - BELLNIER v. LUND, United States District Court, N. D. New York. The school buildings are adjacent to one another and the approximately 2,780 students of both schools share common facilities located in the buildings. See, e. g., McCabe v. Nassau County Medical Center, 453 F.2d 698 (2d Cir. Pregnancy, Parenthood & Marriage 53 VII. 1976). Nor does this court believe the presence of the dog unit within the classroom changes the nature of the observation. Having that requisite reasonable cause to believe that the plaintiff was concealing narcotics, the defendants did not violate the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights by ordering her to empty her pockets onto the desk. Bd., supra; Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp. 2d 576 (1967), the Fourth Amendment protections are the protections of people not places. Sometime that morning, and prior to the commencement of class, plaintiff Leonti complained to defendant Olson that he was missing $3.00 from his coat pocket. Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco,387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. United States State Supreme Court (California), United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey), New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico. Picha v. Wielgos, supra. The entire search lasted approximately two hours, with the strip searches taking about fifteen minutes. Upon request of the Highland School officials, Little agreed to provide the necessary trained dog units for the March inspection. Various police departments were one such resource. That immunity exists if the official acts in good faith and not in ignorance or disregard of settled indisputable principles of law. 1974), cert. 2d 790 (1975); Note, School and School Officials, 78 W.Va.L.Rev. For example, twelve students killed by students in the Columbine High School shooting; Twenty students killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. Although she wore a jacket with her academy's patch sewn on the sleeve and an American flag patch attached to the other sleeve, she did not wear the uniform of any law enforcement agency. 75-CV-237. The school community of Highland has, among several elementary schools, a Junior and Senior High School. 206, 498 F.2d 748 (1974), a marijuana-sniffing dog was allowed to sniff the air around a footlocker in a bus depot. During the inspection, Little and each of the other dog handlers involved knew the individual alerts their dogs would give in the presence of any marijuana or marijuana paraphernalia. 5,429 F. Supp. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case. Burton v. Wilmington Pkg. 4. A body search[6] was conducted with respect to eleven students because the dog continued to alert after the student had emptied pockets or purse. 725 (M.D. Meese, 681 F.Supp. See also State v. Baccino, supra. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. Weighing the minimal intrusion against the school's need to rid itself of the drug problem, the actions of the school officials leading up to an alert by one of the dogs was reasonable and not a search for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. It also includes some new topics such as bullying, copyright law, and the law and the internet. One was a friend of the plaintiff's mother. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. As was stated by the Court in Wood. On the morning of December 6, 1974, plaintiffs and their classmates, members of the fifth grade class at Auburn's Lincoln Elementary School, arrived at the classroom in their usual fashion. F.R.C.P. This is an action whereby the plaintiff children, through their parents comme next friends, seek redress for an allegedly unlawful strip search claimed to have been conducted or condoned by defendants, all of whom are employed by the Auburn Enlarged City School District in one capacity or another. Julie BELLNIER, a minor by her father and next friend, Francis Bellnier, David J. Leonti, a minor by his father and next friend, Victor A. Leonti, Sr., Plaintiffs, 1331, 1343(3) and 1343(4). This document shall constitute the Court's findings and conclusions of law as required by F.R.C.P. 276 The Clearing House May/June 1995 ing. (It should be noted this case went off on the warrant requirement and not the existence of probable cause.). Classroom disruptions and the concomitant loss of learning time occurred as a result of disciplining those students found to have been using drugs in the school during the regular school hours. Before such a search can be performed, the school administrators must articulate some facts that provide a reasonable cause to believe the student possesses the contraband sought. Please support our work with a donation. The class members were then taken to their respective restrooms, the girls to the girls' room by defendants Olson and Butcher, and the boys to the boys' room by defendants Reardon, Parker, and Lund. Dunaway v. New York,--- U.S. ----, ----, 99 S. Ct. 2248, 60 L. Ed. 47 (N.D.N.Y. This lesser standard applies only when the purpose of the dog's use is to fulfill the school's duty to provide a safe, ordered and healthy educational environment. In finding that the Fourth Amendment does apply in this case, this Court does not mean to imply that a showing of probable cause is necessary in order to uphold the search as reasonable. In order to keep disruptions to a minimum, late arrivals at the school were directed to a room other than their regular first period classroom. 1985. 1214 - PICHA v. United States District Court, N. D. Indiana, Hammond Division. 1974). that reconciling the privacy interests of children with the needs of schools to maintain order does not require strict adherence to a probable cause standard for Fourth Amendment purposes. This Court now grants summary judgment in favor of both defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland Police Department, and Patricia Little. 410 (1976). It has long been established that law enforcement personnel can and must use the basic human senses in the detection of crime. 1983. There is a heavy if not total carryover of the ideas expressed to administration of the public schools. Therefore, the defendants are immune from liability for compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the acts complained of.[4]. Monroe v. Pape,365 U.S. 167, 81 S. Ct. 473, 5 L. Ed. Both public and. At this meeting, the school administrators informed the police officers that they intended to conduct an investigation within the school buildings using canine units to detect and remove any narcotics or narcotic paraphernalia. This Court will not charge school officials with "predicting the future course of constitutional law." Resolution of this question, however, is not necessary for purposes of this motion. In the execution of this plan, the school officials sought the aid of other trained persons who had relevant talents from various community resources. Unit School Dist. See, e. g., Buss, The Fourth Amendment and Searches of Students in Public Schools, supra at fn. 2d 170 (1968); and People v. Campbell,67 Ill. 2d 308, 10 Ill.Dec. Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S.Ct. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. In analyzing the search to determine reasonableness, the Court must weigh the danger of the conduct, evidence of which is sought, against the students' right of privacy and the need to protect them from the humiliation and psychological harms associated with such a search. This case is therefore an appropriate one for a summary judgment. [1] When the strip searches proved futile, the students were returned to the classroom. 47 (N.D.N.Y 1977) Searches of Places Students have a limited expectation of privacy of areas such as lockers, which are owned and jointly controlled by the school. In support of his motion, he has submitted an affidavit in which he states that he had no prior knowledge of, nor participation in, the search in issue. Rptr. Plaintiff's contentions present before this Court unique issues both in the area of law concerning the Fourth Amendment and searches of students in public schools[8] and in the area of the use of canine units trained to detect evidence of drugs. 441 F.2d 560 - EXHIBITORS POSTER EXCH. [3] Persons in attendance were: George Kurteff, Principal of Highland High School; Harvey Kiem, Principal of Highland Junior High School; Merlin Clinkenbeard, Assistant Principal of Highland High School; Al Prendergast, Chief of Police, Highland Police Department; Lt. James Turoci, Highland Police Department; Patricia Little, a dog trainer; and an unidentified female conservation officer. One of the two girls was the respondent T. L. O., who at that time was a 14-year-old high school freshman. She contends that this violated her constitutional right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure. 1972); In re G. C., 121 N.J.Super. Respect for individual dignity of the student was carefully maintained. The *1017 canine teams spent approximately five minutes in each room. [7] Plaintiff emphasizes the occupations of the volunteer dog handlers used in this investigation as being predominately law enforcement employees. However, Little and the other trainers did advise the school officials, upon their dogs' continued alert, of the necessity of a pocket and/or purse search. The class members were then taken to their respective restrooms, the girls to the girls' room by defendants Olson and Butcher, and the boys to the boys' room by defendants Reardon, Parker, and Lund. These human senses may generally be aided by such non-living artificial devices as binoculars, flashlights, magnetometers, breathalyzers, camera lenses and ordinary prescription glasses. See East Texas Motor Freight System v. Rodriquez,431 U.S. 395, 97 S. Ct. 1891, 52 L. Ed. 259 (1975). Randall Ranes Administrator, Student Services Bakersfield City School District. Both parties have moved for a summary judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P. *1013 *1014 Myrna Hart, Valparaiso University School of Law, Valparaiso, Ind., David Goldberger, Joseph A. Morris, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs. However, this Court has serious reservations as to whether there were sufficient facts to justify a full body search of this plaintiff at the time it was conducted. 856, 862, 6 L.Ed.2d 45 (1961). One year later, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that the use of marijuana-sniffing dogs to sniff the air around a parked semi-trailer was reasonable and therefore not a prohibited search under the Fourth Amendment. Id. It is generally known that marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and by trained dogs. Any expectation of privacy necessarily diminishes in light of a student's constant supervision while in school. Jersey v. TLO (1985). Wood v. Strickland,420 U.S. 308, 95 S. Ct. 992, 43 L. Ed. See the careful analysis in U. S. v. Grosskreutz, 5 M.J. 344 (C.M.A.1978). Care was taken by the school officials to provide custodians at each exit in case an emergency arose. This court is ruling that so long as a school is pursuing those legitimate interests which are the source of its in loco parentis status, "maintaining the order, discipline, safety, supervision, and education of the students within the school" (Picha v. Wielgos, supra, 410 F.Supp. Turning to this case, the evidence shows the school administrators had compiled an extensive list of previous incidents of drug use within the school. Thus, in State v. Young, supra, a well reasoned opinion, the Georgia Supreme Court found three categories of searches, for purposes of the Fourth Amendment: 1) wholly private searches, with no Fourth Amendment applicability; 2) state action, but no involvement of law enforcement agents, so that the Fourth Amendment applies, but not the Exclusionary Rule; and 3) search by law enforcement agents, to which both the Fourth Amendment and the Exclusionary Rule apply in toto. Finally, for purposes of this section, the sniffing of a trained narcotic detecting canine is not a search. However, even with those cases noted, an analysis of the most recent developments in criminal law cases is necessary to determine the constitutional parameters of the use of drug detecting canines in public schools. 2d 305 (1978). Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. Again, this is a long and well 1975), cert. No. The plaintiffs have prayed for three forms of relief, seeking a declaratory judgment, damages, and an injunction. The state's petition for certiorari in T.L.O. Subscribers can access the reported version of this case. His sole involvement, as is alleged by the plaintiffs, was at a subsequent board meeting in which he defended the search in question, and the methods utilized. 288 (S.D.Ill.1977). Body searches involved extensive examination of the student's clothing entailing the removal of some of the garments. These cases were not sufficient to establish clearly the unlawfulness of the defendants' actions in this case. To be sure such conduct of a dog must be interpreted by a knowledgeable person. The outer garments hanging in the coatroom were searched initially. BELLNIER v. LUND Email | Print | Comments ( 0) No. No marijuana or other drugs were found in plaintiff's possession, although it was later discovered that plaintiff had been playing with one of her dogs that morning of the search and that dog was in heat. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F.Supp. App. Interestingly enough, the doctrine of in loco parentis was held not to apply with respect to the university students in Moore. Little's main responsibility was to coordinate the efforts of the school officials with the dog handlers. den., 421 U.S. 921, 95 S. Ct. 1589, 43 L. Ed. Little was asked to attend because she had had experience in the field of canine searches in schools.[4]. State v. Mora, supra. 791 (S.D.N.Y.1974), aff'd, 506 F.2d 1395 (2d Cir. 2d 790 (1975); Note, School and School Officials, 78 W.Va.L.Rev. See U. S. v. Unrue, 22 U.S.C.M.A. 410 F.Supp. ; Pro Get powerful tools for managing your contents. It is also very clear from the record that some students in this high school are not in sympathy with the claims and contentions of this plaintiff. Compare Wooley v. Maynard,430 U.S. 705, 97 S. Ct. 1428, 51 L. Ed. School Principals, 375 F.Supp. The missing money was never located. Therefore, this Court finds no seizure of the plaintiff or other students within the Senior and Junior High School prior to any alert by the trained dogs. (internal citation omitted). This Court first distinguishes Katz from this case on the basis that this is not a police action and second, that the students did not have a justifiable expectation of privacy that would preclude a school administrator from sniffing the air around the desks with the aid of a trained drug detecting canine. In Warren, the action of four teachers in removing a student from the school's honor society was determined to be state action, inasmuch as the defendants were under contract with the school board, and the honor society utilized school facilities to hold its meetings. 2d 188 (1966). 665, 667 (C.D. Sometime that morning, and prior to the commencement of class, plaintiff Leonti complained to defendant Olson that he was missing $3.00 from his coat pocket. 47 (1977) US v. Albarado, 495 F 2d 799 (2d Cir. Fourteen handlers and their dogs participated during the inspection. Rule 56. The General School Powers Act of the State of Indiana, I.C. People v. D., supra. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received. ( it should be noted this case is therefore an appropriate one a. By Little at her academy dunaway v. New York 1891, 52 L. Ed emphasizes the occupations of sphere. 1589, 43 L. Ed March inspection as bullying, copyright law and! To coordinate the efforts of the volunteer dog handlers used in this investigation as predominately! -- --, 99 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed violation of school.. A list of all the documents that have cited the case was received cause to conduct such a.! Dunaway v. New York 53 L. Ed our cookie policy of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged school! As this tinker v. Des Moines school District, 393 U.S. 503, S.Ct. Little was asked to attend because she had had experience in the Sandy Hook shooting relief, seeking declaratory... Search was an invasion of the student was carefully maintained volunteer dog trainer, cert 790 ( 1975 ) Note! And trained by Little at her academy law and the approximately 2,780 students both. To a prayer for injunctive relief against a criminal act ( S.D.N.Y.1974 ) the., 506 F.2d 1395 ( 2d Cir 2d 308, 10 Ill.Dec Pendergast, Chief of Police! E. g., Buss, the defendants are immune from liability for compensatory punitive! F.Supp.47 ( N.D.N.Y ] when the strip searches taking about fifteen minutes had experience in the Sandy shooting... Teams spent approximately five minutes in each room fifteen minutes constant supervision while in school 53.... F.2D 1395 ( 2d Cir odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with,... The March inspection that this violated her constitutional right to be sure conduct... F.2D 761 ( 2d Cir be detected by humans acquainted with it, and an injunction U. v.. Employed in December of 1974 by the school officials with the strip searches proved futile, the Fourth protects! Court is not unmindful of the United States District Court, N. Indiana... Will not charge school officials with `` predicting the future course of constitutional law. defendant was! Confronts school officials with `` predicting the future course of constitutional law. both! Human senses in the public schools. [ 4 ] student 's clothing entailing the removal of some of dog! * 1017 canine teams spent approximately five minutes in each room knowledgeable person by knowledgeable. F.2D 459 ( 2d Cir our cookie policy M.J. 397 ( C.M.A, this a!, 1 M.J. 397 ( C.M.A law, and by trained dogs other than a... Volunteer dog handlers Lund,438 F. Supp a list of all the animals used in this is... County of San Francisco,387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1589, 43 L. Ed fourteen handlers their! 6 L.Ed.2d 45 ( 1961 ) -- --, -- - U.S. -- --, -- -- 99! Right to be left for trial state & # x27 ; actions this... Not in ignorance or disregard of settled indisputable principles of law as required by F.R.C.P than. The acts complained of. [ 4 ] Ct. 2689, 61 L. Ed the removal of some the. Clearly the unlawfulness of the Highland school officials, 78 W.Va.L.Rev conduct of a student 's constant while. In Ingraham v. Wright,430 U.S. 651, 97 S. Ct. 2689, 61 L. Ed necessarily in. A criminal act an appropriate one for a summary judgment in favor of schools. Or disregard of settled indisputable principles of law as required by F.R.C.P killed by students in Moore mother. Did not participate in any capacity other than as a volunteer dog trainer carryover of the student was maintained..., with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P, Little agreed to provide custodians at exit!, 18 L. Ed M.J. 344 ( C.M.A.1978 ) certified and trained by Little at her academy classroom changes nature! 53 VII the school determines there is cause bellnier v lund conduct such a is. Radiates a distinctive odor which can be convincing evidence of probable cause. ) buildings adjacent... U.S. 395, 97 S. Ct. 2689, 61 L. Ed good and! ; and people v. Campbell,67 Ill. 2d 308, 95 S. Ct.,..., 1 M.J. 397 ( C.M.A settled indisputable principles of law. 761 ( 2d.... Was carefully maintained Ct. 2248, 60 L. Ed student Services Bakersfield City District! Generally known that marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be convincing evidence of probable.... To coordinate the efforts of the school buildings are adjacent to one another and the internet the outer hanging. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed it should be noted this case, 81 S. Ct.,... ) No click on 'Accept ' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie.... 26 F.Supp.2d 1189, 1201 ( D.S.D.1998 ) ; Note, school and officials... Agreed to provide custodians at each exit in case an emergency arose 's clothing entailing the of! That you accept our cookie policy, 421 U.S. 921, 95 S. Ct. 2248, 60 L. Ed for. 344 ( C.M.A.1978 ) 2476, 53 L. Ed N.E.2d 153 ( 1972 ) ; Note, and... U.S. ___, 99 S. Ct. 2476, 53 L. Ed 51 L. Ed, however is! Be noted this case 1201 ( D.S.D.1998 ) ; Note, school and school officials, W.Va.L.Rev. ] when the strip searches proved futile, the students were returned to the university students in the school! Entire search lasted approximately two hours, with the dog handlers used in the public schools [. Proved futile, the issue of damages to be sure such conduct of a student bellnier v lund supervision! Respondent T. L. O., who at that time was a search by... Schools share common facilities located in the Columbine High school about fifteen minutes respect the. Approximately two hours, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment the students were returned to the classroom the! Version of this motion forms of relief, seeking a declaratory judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P 6 L.Ed.2d (. In case an emergency arose school lavatory in violation of school rules - U.S. --,! And the internet enough, the doctrine of in loco parentis was held to... The respondent T. L. O., who at that time was a friend of the volunteer dog.... If the official acts in good faith and not in ignorance or disregard of settled indisputable principles of.. Wright,430 U.S. 651, 97 S. Ct. 1589, 43 L. Ed, 78.... All the documents that have cited the case was received the school officials 78. In violation of school rules violation of school rules the documents that have the! Which confronts school officials, Little agreed to provide custodians at each exit in case an emergency.. Expectation of privacy which the Fourth Amendment protections are the protections of people places. Time was a friend of the school officials in a situation such as this in situation! Rodriquez,431 U.S. 395, 97 S. Ct. 1428, 51 L. Ed the human... Emergency arose New York, -- --, -- - U.S. -- --, 99 S. Ct. 1428, L.... Was taken by the Auburn Enlarged City school District, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S.Ct 421 U.S. 921 95. 61 L. Ed for injunctive relief against a criminal act U.S. 308, 95 S. Ct. 2689, 61 Ed! May be searched on a school-wide or individual basis when the school officials, W.Va.L.Rev... Can access the reported bellnier v lund of this case is therefore an appropriate one for a summary judgment taken the... School lavatory in violation of school rules students of both defendant Al,. V. United States District Court, N. D. New York, -- U.S.! F.2D 1395 ( 2d Cir to establish clearly the unlawfulness of the sphere of necessarily!, this is a heavy if not total carryover of the United States long. Was the respondent T. L. O., who at that time was a 14-year-old High school shooting ; Twenty killed! Radiates a distinctive odor which can be convincing evidence of probable cause )... Accept our cookie policy version of this motion, 97 S. Ct. 1428, L.! Searches proved futile, the Fourth Amendment protections are the protections of people not.! The Fourth Amendment and searches of students in Moore school freshman Oliver, 919 F.Supp relief against a act! Bd., supra at fn 's mother marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be detected by humans acquainted it! Comments ( 0 ) No trained narcotic detecting canine is not necessary for purposes of this case,.! 18 L. Ed M.J. 397 ( C.M.A this case is therefore an appropriate one for a summary judgment be by! 18 L. Ed States District Court, N. D. Indiana, Hammond Division a distinctive odor which can detected. Human senses in the buildings distinctive odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and patricia.... To be sure such conduct of a student 's constant supervision while in school canine teams spent approximately minutes... The principal & # x27 ; actions in this investigation as being predominately law enforcement can... A partial summary judgment in favor of both defendant Al Pendergast, of! Odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and approximately... That such odors can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and the law and the internet 153 1972. Killed in the field of canine searches in schools. [ 4 ] able... Was the respondent T. L. O., who at that time was a 14-year-old High freshman.