*1026 It is also apparent that the use of properly trained dogs in public areas accessible to them is a useful aid to law enforcement officials in determining the existence of probable cause to believe that contraband exists within a certain locale. F.R.C.P. (Although cases predating T.L.O., see, e.g., Bellnier v. Lund. [1] When the strip searches proved futile, the students were returned to the classroom. The health and safety of all students at the two schools was threatened by an increase in drug use. Moreover, there was a feeling, at least by some students including the plaintiff, that peer pressure existed in favor of using drugs while on campus. Education of Individuals with Disabilities 54 Board of Educ . Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. 2d 433 (1979). Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. For example, twelve students killed by students in the Columbine High School shooting; Twenty students killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. Defendant Knox had no advance knowledge of the search in issue, nor had he previously instructed the remaining defendants as to the procedures to be followed in case of an incident of this nature. 1974); see also State v. Baccino,282 A.2d 869 (Del.Sup.1971) (dictum). Accordingly, this Court holds that the defendants may be held liable under 42 U.S.C. 2d 1081 (1961) (opinions of Justices Clark, Black and Harlan). The school officials insisted, and the police agreed, that no criminal investigations would occur as a result of any evidence recovered during the school investigation. "The student's right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure must be balanced with the necessity for the school officials to be able to maintain order and discipline in their schools and to fulfill their duties under the in loco parentis doctrine to protect the health and welfare of their students." SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, United States District Court, N. D. Texas, Lubbock Division. Ball-Chatham C.U.S.D. There, a search was conducted of their desks, books, and once again of their coats. GALFORD v. MARK ANTHONY B on CaseMine. 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. 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. It was only upon a continued alert of the trained canine that the school officials based their decision to search the plaintiff. 1043 (N.D.Tex.1974), and Lopez v. Williams, 372 F.Supp. Each of the students entered the classroom and placed his outer garment in a coatroom located wholly within, and accessible only from, the classroom. 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. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. 780 (D.S.Dak.S.D.1973). 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. v.
(Bellnier v. Lund (N.D.N.Y.1977), Donovan v. Dewey (1981) 452 U.S. 594, 606-607, 101 S.Ct. See, e. g., Terry v. Ohio, supra. . 791 (S.D.N.Y.1974), aff'd, 506 F.2d 1395 (2d Cir. NOTES In In re T.L.O. People v. D., supra; see also Buss, The Fourth Amendment and Searches in Public Schools, supra. Because this Court has ruled that the nude body search of plaintiff was in violation of the Fourth Amendment and thus unlawful, the request now becomes similar to a prayer for injunctive relief against a criminal act and therefore unnecessary. Upon being asked to enter the inner office, two women introduced themselves to the plaintiff. No liability can be found for any of the actions of this defendant. Rule 56, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment, the issue of damages to be left for trial. F.R.C.P. While it would seem self-evident that the actions of a teacher or school official employed by a public municipality board of education would constitute state action under Monroe v. Pape, supra, this has not been a universally held notion among the various federal courts. Additionally, there was evidence from some students of refusal to speak out against those students using drugs for fear of reprisals. A search of those items failed to reveal the missing money. A canine team visited each classroom in both the Junior and Senior High School buildings. Defendant Knox's sole participation in the incident occurred on December 9, 1974, when, while speaking at a formal meeting of the School Board, he defended the legality of the search in issue. Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. Plaintiff is entitled to declaratory relief only upon the Court's finding that the nude body search made without a finding of any reasonable cause to believe is in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. A common thread that runs through all four of the above cited circuit cases was the fact that the law enforcement officers had previous independent information or "tips" concerning the whereabouts of the drugs that were later sniffed out by the dogs. In the execution of this plan, the school officials sought the aid of other trained persons who had relevant talents from various community resources. Although the occupations of the 14 handlers did range from housewife to deputy county sheriffs, this Court attached no particular significance to their employment since each handler present was not actively engaged in their occupation. Those members of the proposed class are not so numerous so as to make joinder of them as parties impracticable. That New York State is inextricably entwined in its various municipal school systems is obvious from reading the various provisions of the New York Education Law (McKinney's 1970); cf. The pocket search was conducted in furtherance of the school's legitimate interest in eliminating drug trafficking within the school. Turning to this case, the evidence shows the school administrators had compiled an extensive list of previous incidents of drug use within the school. People v. D., 34 N.Y.2d 490, 358 N.Y.S.2d 410, 315 N.E.2d 471. [4] The Supreme Court has recently agreed to hear a case involving the issue of damages for the actions of a teacher taken during the course of his duties. K.C.L.Rev. See U. S. v. Fulero, 162 U.S.App.D.C. Bd., supra; Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp. 1983 and 1985, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. was granted in October of 1983. In Palacios, the actions of a principal and vice-principal in refusing to allow a student to run for election to student government were found not to constitute state action, as being done pursuant to student government regulations, rather than school policy. The Fourth Amendment recognizes that for each individual there is a sphere of privacy which that individual can justifiedly expect government officials not to invade. The Supreme Court of the United States has yet to rule explicitly on whether the use of narcotic detection dogs in the context of the Fourth Amendment establishes probable cause. In Moore v. Student Affairs Committee of Troy State University,284 F. Supp. It takes more than mere verbiage in a complaint to meet that burden. 2d 649 (1976); U. S. v. Martinez-Miramontes, 494 F.2d 808 (9th Cir. 380, 323 A.2d 145 (1974); Mercer v. State, 450 S.W.2d 715 (Tex.Civ.App.1970); In re Donaldson,269 Cal. Defendant Knox had no advance knowledge of the search in issue, nor had he previously instructed the remaining defendants as to the procedures to be followed in case of an incident of this nature. of the information used as a justification for the search." LEGION, United States District Court, E. D. The use of drug detecting canine units was discussed at the March 6, 1979 meeting of the Board of the Highland Community School District and Superintendent of Schools, Omer Renfrow. at 292.[13]. Such a class would be certified pursuant to F.R.C.P. When a dog alerted to the plaintiff, she was ordered by a police officer to empty her pockets onto the desk under the supervision of a school administrator. 441 F.2d 560 - EXHIBITORS POSTER EXCH. 47 (N.D.N.Y.1977). 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. While he might arguably be a proper defendant with respect to injunctive relief, this Court has already stated that an injunction should not issue. 282 (1977); Note, Search and SeizureSchool Officials' Authority to Search Students Is Augmented by the In Loco Parentis Doctrine, 5 Fla.St.U.L.Rev. 47, 52 (N.D.N.Y. Mackenzie, Smith, Lewis, Michell & Hughes, Syracuse, N. Y., Kevin M. Reilly, Syracuse, N. Y., of counsel, for defendants. 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. Resolution of this question, however, is not necessary for purposes of this motion. In this case, the court finds the search unreasonable because no facts exist, other than the dog's alert, which would reasonably lead the school officials to believe the plaintiff possessed any drugs. 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. See Baker v. McCollan, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S. Ct. 2689, 61 L. Ed. 3d 320, 102 Cal. Care was taken by the school officials to provide custodians at each exit in case an emergency arose. The effect was anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people. (2 times) View All Authorities Share Support FLP CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Although the students were requested to remain in their first period classes, those wishing to use the washroom facilities were accommodated by an escort to the washroom door. 2nd Circuit. You can explore additional available newsletters here. . Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp. 1978); and Miller v. Motorola, Inc., 76 F.R.D. While there is a core of privacy so vital to the student's personhood that it must be respected by a school official standing in loco parentis, that sphere of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment can usually be invaded by a school official standing in loco parentis without a warrant, and (rather than upon probable cause) upon reasonable cause to believe that the student has violated or is violating school policy. 725 (M.D. It is generally known that marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and by trained dogs. [6] Although it was not properly defined at trial, a body search was something less than the nude search that plaintiff complains she was subject to. See the answerSee the answerSee the answerdone loading 410 (1976). 2d 576 (1976), constitute a per se limitation on the proper use of properly trained dogs in the limited and legitimate area of police investigation. You're all set! In doing so, such school officials are not acting as police officers but are simply meeting their obligations as school officials. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit.