An analysis of a court case new jersey vs tlo

When respondent, in response to the Assistant Vice Principal's questioning, denied that she had been smoking and claimed that she did not smoke at all, the Assistant Vice Principal demanded to see her purse. Upon opening the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes and also noticed a package of cigarette rolling papers that are commonly associated with the use of marihuana.

First, the Court concluded that the search was justified at its inception. They were caught by a teacher, who took the girls to the Assistant Vice Principal.

New jersey v tlo precedent

The Supreme Court ultimately held that probable cause was not required in school searches, finding that students were subject to a lower level of Fourth Amendment protection. When respondent, in response to the Assistant Vice Principal's questioning, denied that she had been smoking and claimed that she did not smoke at all, the Assistant Vice Principal demanded to see her purse. It also applies to the conduct of public school officials. The Assistant Vice Principal then demanded to see T. At the juvenile proceeding, T. The U. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. Then, the discovery of the rolling papers justified a further search based on reasonable suspicion of marijuana activity. She moved to suppress all of the evidence, claiming the search of her purse violated the Fourth Amendment.

Even though school officials have a special type of authority over schoolchildren, they are still representatives of the state. When the vice-principal was searching for the cigarettes, the drug-related evidence was in plain view. But a moment later it was a teacher who now stood across from them in the smoky bathroom air, arms folded.

New jersey v tlo quizlet

The school called her mother to bring her to the police station, where T. Applying the reasonableness standard to the present case, the search of T. But a moment later it was a teacher who now stood across from them in the smoky bathroom air, arms folded. Court decision[ edit ] The Supreme Court of the United States , in a 6—3 decision issued by Justice White, balancing between the legitimate expectation of privacy of the individual, even a child, and the school's interest in maintaining order and discipline, held for the appellant the state. For instance, in Mapp v. The case involved a year-old freshman found smoking cigarettes in a school bathroom. Her possession of any cigarettes was relevant to whether or not she was being truthful, and since she had been caught in the bathroom and taken directly to the office, it was reasonable to assume she had the cigarettes in her purse. Supreme Court agreed that a warrantless search by a school official does not violate the Fourth Amendment in general, but that the search in this case was unreasonable. Traditional Fourth Amendment rules should be eased to strike that balance. Justice Stevens, in his concurrence in part and dissent in part, noted that the Court should address the original issue, i. In , the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.

New Jersey v. He explained: Today's decision sanctions school officials to conduct full scale searches on a 'reasonableness' standard whose only definite content is that it is not the same test as the 'probable cause' standard found in the text of the Fourth Amendment.

new jersey v tlo impact

Supreme Court held that Traditional Fourth Amendment rules should be eased to strike that balance. The initial report from the teacher that T. Incorporation of the Fourth Amendment In several cases, the U.

Rated 6/10 based on 26 review
Download
Landmark Supreme Court Cases