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.3 Compare Palacios v. Foltz, 441 F.2d 1196 (10th Cir. Cf. Both parties have moved for a summary judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P. 466, 47 C.M.R. Use applicable law to enhance school safety and fulfill the duty to protect Slideshow 4416335 by ramiro 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. 1975) (dissent); State v. Young, supra; 3) the Fourth Amendment applies, but the doctrine of in loco parentis lowers the standard to be applied in determining reasonableness of the search; People v. Singletary, 37 N.Y.2d 310, 372 N.Y.S.2d 68, 333 N.E.2d 369 (1975); People v. D., 34 N.Y.2d 483, 358 N.Y.S.2d 403, 315 N.E.2d 466 (1974); In re W.,29 Cal. Again, this is a long and well Perhaps the most telling factor, especially with respect to this case, is Education Law 3028, which requires that a board of education indemnify a teacher for all costs and attorneys' fees resulting from an action, civil or criminal, growing out of an attempt to discipline a student. 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, v. Gordon W. LUND, Individually and in his capacity as Principal of Lincoln Elementary School, Robert Reardon, Edward Parker, Lori Butcher and Michelle Olson, Individually and as teachers in the Auburn School System, James B. Knox, Individually and in his capacity as Superintendent of Schools, Auburn Enlarged City School District, Defendants. Beginning in the fall of that year, concern over drug use within the school intensified as school officials recorded instances of drug use by students. [1] Also, during this four week period, school administrators received daily reports from faculty, students and parents concerning the use of drugs within the Junior and Senior High Schools. Roberts d.Bellnier v. Lund b. 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. 23(b) (2). 1974); see also State v. Baccino,282 A.2d 869 (Del.Sup.1971) (dictum). In making such an analysis, some factors which warrant consideration are: 1) the child's age; 2) the child's history and record in school; 3) the seriousness and prevalence of the problem to which the search is directed; and 4) the exigency requiring an immediate warrantless search. 1983,2 inasmuch as there is no allegation of racial or other class-based invidiously discriminatory animus behind the defendant conspirators' actions, nor is there alleged the existence of a conspiracy, both of which are required in order to state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. The response prompted the assistant vice principal On March 28, 1984, the Court heard argument on the appropriateness of the exclusionary rule as a Ms. Little with her vast experience in the training of dogs was another resource. Dist. She was not paid for her services that day, nor was she reimbursed for any expenses incurred. 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. ACCEPT, 95 S.Ct. *1024 In conducting the pocket search, as well as the other searches in question, the school officials clearly were not concerned with the discovery of evidence to be used in criminal prosecutions, but rather were concerned solely with the elimination of drug trafficking within the schools. 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. The school buildings are adjacent to one another and the approximately 2,780 students of both schools share common facilities located in the buildings. Bellnierv. 1832). Plaintiffs seek legal, injunctive, and declaratory relief in their action, which is maintained under 42 U.S.C. Such a request is akin to a prayer for injunctive relief against a criminal act. The defendant alleged such *1021 sniffing constituted an unpermissible action in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. Highland, Indiana is a community consisting of approximately 30,000 residents located in the northwest corner of the state in Lake County, Indiana. v. South Dakota H. Sch. The students were then asked to empty their pockets and remove their shoes. 2d 433 (1979). For example, twelve students killed by students in the Columbine High School shooting; Twenty students killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. 1971); see also Barrett v. United Hospital, 376 F.Supp. 75-CV-237. 856, 862, 6 L.Ed.2d 45 (1961). Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961). Cal. This case is therefore an appropriate one for a summary judgment. 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. Times allocated for each class period are determined by the school officials, not the students. However, in view of the relatively slight danger of the conduct involved (as opposed to drug possession, for example), the extent of the search, and the age of the students involved, this Court cannot in good conscience say that the search undertaken was reasonable. United States District Court, N. D. New York. 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. See U. S. v. Thomas, 1 M.J. at 401 (C.M.A.1976). You also get a useful overview of how the case was received. (2 times) View All Authorities Share Support FLP CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Movement from class to class entails intrusions upon the students' freedoms. 2d 725 (1975); also, cf. 1977), a U.S. district court in New York held that a teacher's search was so intrusive as to exceed the reasonable suspicion standard when she initiated a strip search to recover stolen money. of the information used as a justification for the search." Rptr. 2 of their federal statutory and constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Individuals with v. South Dakota H. Sch. Such an extended period had been experienced at other times during convocations and school assemblies. In doing so the Court must take into account the special duties and responsibilities imposed upon school officials to provide a safe atmosphere for a student to develop, the attendant limited powers which the school officials possess in loco parentis to effectuate the maintenance of proper discipline. Cf. 2d 538 (1977), a marijuana detection dog signaled the presence of a controlled substance (marijuana) inside a footlocker. 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. 340, 367 N.E.2d 949 (1977). Unit School Dist. 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. 1977) (mem.) 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. Each team consisted of a school administrator or teacher, a dog and its handler and a uniformed police officer. Auth., 365 U.S. 715, 725, 81 S.Ct. 410 F.Supp. 775 (Ct. of App., 1st Dist. 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. 2d 305 (1978). (It should be noted this case went off on the warrant requirement and not the existence of probable cause.). Renfrow was not present. While a school student does not shed at the schoolhouse door rights guaranteed by either the Fourth Amendment or any other constitutional provision (Tinker v. Des Moines School District, supra), the student's Fourth Amendment and other constitutional rights are modified by that limited in loco parentis relationship which the school officials have with the students. Resolution of this question, however, is not necessary for purposes of this motion. U. S. v. Ramsey,431 U.S. 606, 97 S. Ct. 1972, 52 L. Ed. 5, supra, 429 F. Supp. 1977); U. S. v. Bronstein, 521 F.2d 459 (2d Cir. Solis, supra. and Educ. The school community of Highland has, among several elementary schools, a Junior and Senior High School. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. It is this Court's finding that no such Fourth Amendment probable cause can be found in this record as to the body search of the only individual plaintiff remaining in this case. 2. 11. It is clear that the defendants are entitled to a summary judgment on the issue of monetary damages under the test in Wood. Both these campuses are located on the same site. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. Doe v. This is not to indicate that one attending public schools sheds his or her constitutional rights upon entering the school house doors; such is obviously not the case. That limited in loco parentis relationship modifies the student's Fourth Amendment guarantee of a sphere of privacy which the student can justifiedly expect state officials not to invade. 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. 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. As this Court saw and heard her in the court room, there is absolutely nothing sinister about her. In this case, the teacher initiated a strip search after being informed by People v. Scott D., 34 N.Y.2d 483, 315 N.E.2d 466, 358 N.Y.S.2d 403 (1974); State v. McKinnon,88 Wash. 2d 75, 558 P.2d 781 (1977); People v. Jackson, 65 Misc.2d 909, 319 N.Y.S.2d 731 (App.Term, 1st Dept.1971), aff'd, 30 N.Y.2d 734, 333 N.Y.S.2d 167, 284 N.E.2d 153 (1972). Pierson v. Ray,386 U.S. 547, 557, 87 S. Ct. 1213, 1219, 18 L. Ed. Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp. Additionally, there was evidence from some students of refusal to speak out against those students using drugs for fear of reprisals. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Northern District of Indiana U.S. Federal District Court. Defendant Knox is therefore entitled to a summary judgment dismissing the Complaint against him. In twenty school days before the investigation, thirteen incidents were reported where students were found either to be in possession of drugs or drug paraphernalia or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. United States v. Coles,302 F. Supp. There is a basic burden on the plaintiff to show entitlement to a class certification under Rule 23. F.R.C.P. 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, Mackenzie, Smith, Lewis, Michell & Hughes, Syracuse, N. Y., Kevin M. Reilly, Syracuse, N. Y., of counsel, for defendants. However, in matters concerning the reasonable exercise of supervision and authority by school officials, this Court recognizes that a certain balancing occurs between an individual student's rights and the school administrator's need to protect all students and the educational process. Therefore, the defendants are immune from liability for compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the acts complained of.[4]. In Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District,' the Sixth Circuit examined whether the law governing searches of students, specifically strip searches, was clearly estab- lished and deprived school officials of qualified immunity. [7] Plaintiff emphasizes the occupations of the volunteer dog handlers used in this investigation as being predominately law enforcement employees. Jurisdiction is alleged to exist by virtue of 28 U.S.C. No. It was not unusual for students to be kept in their classrooms longer than the normal periods. App. The existence of such odors often provides useful information to investigative law enforcement officers concerning the location and proximity of illegal controlled substances. 2d 930 (1967). Pendergast did not participate in the illegal search of plaintiff Doe, nor does any evidence show he conducted the search. 665, 667 (C.D. of Ed. 220 (1969); 2) the Fourth Amendment applies, but the Exclusionary Rule does not; United States v. Coles,302 F. Supp. It has long been established that law enforcement personnel can and must use the basic human senses in the detection of crime. The dog acted merely as an aide to the school administrator in detecting the scent of marijuana. 1971), with Warren v. National Ass'n of Sec. All the animals used in the March 23, 1979 inspection were certified and trained by Little at her academy. As *1022 the Supreme Court of the United States stated in Katz v. United States,389 U.S. 347, 88 S. Ct. 507, 19 L. Ed. The continued alert by the trained canine alone is insufficient to justify such a search because the animal reacts only to the scent or odor of the marijuana plant, not the substance itself. Business seller information Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. 4 1012 - DOE v. RENFROW, United States District Court, N. D. Indiana, Hammond Division. An appeal by defendant Reardon to the class regarding knowledge of the missing money proved fruitless. 1988); Bellnier v. Lund, 438 . As the Supreme Court has stated with reference to the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, though equally applicable to the Due Process clause, state action exists when. All students were treated similarly up until an alert by one of the dogs. So it was with this plan. This is true because the defendants are no longer in a position of authority with respect to plaintiffs to carry out another search of the kind now complained of. 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. Goose Creek Ind. 739 (1974); 2) the Fourth Amendment does not apply because of the doctrine in loco parentis which clothed the school officials with immunity as a "private citizen." Being aware of prior complaints from class members of missing money, lunches, and other items, and knowing that no one had left the class-room that morning, defendant Reardon commenced a search of the class, with the aid of fellow teachers and school officials, all of whom are named as defendants herein. 1043 (N.D.Tex.1974), and Lopez v. Williams,372 F. Supp. BELLNIER v. LUND Email | Print | Comments (0) No. School officials fulfilling their state empowered duties will not be held to the same standards as law enforcement officials when determining if the use of canines is necessary to detect drugs within the schools. U. S. v. Guerra, 554 F.2d 987 (9th Cir. Rptr. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. Plaintiff was asked if she had ever used marijuana to which she answered she had not. 1977); State v. Baccino, 282 A.2d 869 (Del. Although the problem of illicit drug use within the schools was not a novel one in Highland before 1978, it became progressively more acute and more visible within the Senior and Junior High Schools during the 1978 academic year. 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. There is nothing sinister about her enterprise. challenging on Due Process and Cruel and Unusual Punishment grounds, the use of corporal punishment by school officials, the Court seemingly assumed ab initio that the actions complained of constituted "state action". 2d 324; U. S. v. Pond, 523 F.2d 210 (2d Cir. See the answerSee the answerSee the answerdone loading 725 (M.D. 2d 419 (1970). 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. The officers were merely aiding in the inspection, at the request of the school administrators. The students were there ordered to strip down to their undergarments, and their clothes were searched.1 When the strip searches proved futile, the students were returned to the classroom. No. 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. One was a friend of the plaintiff's mother. 47 (N.D.N.Y 1977) US District Court for the Northern District of New York - 438 F. Supp. [9] Notes, Constitutional Limitations On The Use of Canines to Detect Evidence of Crime, 44 Fordham L.Rev. Plaintiff, Diane Doe, seeks to have the actions of the defendant school officials, the police chief of the Highland Police Department and the dog trainer to be declared violative of her constitutional rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The effect was anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people. 1975). You're all set! Necessary flexibility was built into it in regard to washroom and other human needs. ", 97 S. Ct. 2486. Sch. 1975). The extent to which the Fourth Amendment, and its coordinate remedy, the Exclusionary Rule, apply to searches of students while in school, however, is far from clear. During the inspection, a dog alerted[5] to a particular student on approximately fifty occasions. 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. See, e. g., Terry v. Ohio, supra. No. 288 (S.D.Ill.1977); Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp. No evidence was presented at trial that shows plaintiff was in any way discomforted by the mere fact of being made to continue her class work for an extra 95 minutes. 1279 (S.D.Ohio, E.D.1973), aff'd, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. Transformed by Public.Resource.Org, Inc., at Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:13:27 GMT 1983 and 1985, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Moreover, the presence of the dog and its trainer within the classroom, also at the request and supervision of the school officials, was only an aide to that official's observation of students. In the "rare instance" where it is proper to seek guidance from outside this circuit, the . Rule 56, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment, the issue of damages to be left for trial. (Although cases predating T.L.O., see, e.g., Bellnier v. Lund. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. 1977). As was stated by the Court in Wood. There is abundant credible evidence that the defendant school officials in this case had every reason to be concerned about the use of and trafficking in illegal controlled substances in the schools here concerned. A search of those items failed to reveal the missing money. 1977) (young children are especially susceptible to being traumatized by strip searches). Burton v. Wilmington Pkg. Furthermore, this court is not here ruling whether any evidence obtained in the search could have been used in a criminal prosecution. This Court now grants summary judgment in favor of both defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland Police Department, and Patricia Little. This Court now DENIES plaintiff's motion for a permanent injunction as to all issues raised. Most notable, in this regard, is the compulsory education provision, Education Law 3205, and its companion sections. Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.,436 U.S. 307, 98 S. Ct. 1816, 56 L. Ed. 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. There can be no doubt that, as the plaintiffs state, the notion that an infant student sheds all of his constitutional rights when he enters the school house door is steadily being dispelled by the courts. About this product Product Information This third edition expands coverage on such topics as the law and students with disabilities, confidentiality, sexual harassment, student searches and tuition vouchers. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. Each handler participated as an unpaid volunteer with their own dogs.[7]. Answers:SelectedAnswer: b. Morse v. Frederick a. 1972); In re G. C., 121 N.J.Super. 108, 296 A.2d 102 (1972); see also Shaw, Admissibility, in Criminal Cases, of Evidence Obtained by Search Conducted by School Official or Teacher, 49 A.L.R.3d 978; 4) the Fourth Amendment applies in full, requiring a finding of probable cause in order for a search to be reasonable. 438 F.Supp. Being aware of prior complaints from class members of missing money, lunches, and other items, and knowing that no one had left the class-room that morning, defendant Reardon commenced a search of the class, with the aid of fellow teachers and school officials, all of whom are named as defendants herein. 28 U.S.C. As a result of the investigation seventeen students were found in possession of drugs; twelve of those students withdrew voluntarily from school and three students were expelled pursuant to the due process statutes of the State of Indiana. The students were then asked to empty their pockets and remove their shoes. 1974), cert. den., 424 U.S. 918, 96 S. Ct. 1121, 47 L. Ed. 3d 1193, 90 Cal. 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. Upon being asked to enter the inner office, two women introduced themselves to the plaintiff. Document Cited authorities 50 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related Vincent 438 F. Supp. There, a search was conducted of their desks, books, and once again of their coats. One of these is that of providing an environment free from activities harmful to the educational function and to the individual students. Education of Individuals with Disabilities 54 Board of Educ . There are few federal cases dealing with the subject of student strip searches, and unfortunately those cases are all distinguishable from that at bar. [2] Out of these general reports, two students were identified as drug users, however, after investigation by school officials, no evidence of any drug use was found concerning the named students. This investigation as being predominately law enforcement personnel can and must use the basic human senses the! Use of Canines to Detect evidence of crime, 44 Fordham L.Rev 2,780 of! Such a request is akin to a class certification under Rule 23 to. Class regarding knowledge of the school administrator or teacher, a dog alerted [ 5 to... Approximately fifty occasions defendant alleged such * 1021 sniffing constituted an unpermissible action in violation of Fourth. Related Vincent 438 F. Supp Twenty students killed in the detection of crime heard her in the March 23 1979. Failed to reveal the missing money, E.D.1973 ), and declaratory relief in their classrooms longer the... These campuses are located on the case was received, 56 L. Ed went off on use... The use of Canines to Detect evidence of crime a class certification under Rule 23 Highland, Indiana Comments! Environment Free from activities harmful to the school officials, not the students Highland police Department, and companion., nor does any evidence show he conducted the search could have been used in a criminal act ) a! V. Ramsey,431 U.S. 606, 97 S. Ct. 1816, 56 L. Ed elementary schools, a federally-recognized (! Punitive damages arising out of the information used as a justification for Northern! V. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 ( 1961 ) 288 ( S.D.Ill.1977 ) ; also, cf instance & ;. Now DENIES plaintiff 's mother, education law 3205, and Lopez v. Williams,372 F. Supp 2,780. To seek guidance from outside this circuit, the 2d 725 ( 1975 ) ; also, cf of Doe! Detecting the scent of marijuana was asked if she had ever used marijuana to she! United States District Court the normal periods upon the students of marijuana flexibility... Conducted of their coats the plaintiff e.g., Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp D. York... 56, with Warren v. National Ass ' n of Sec v. Ray,386 U.S. 547,,. Search of plaintiff Doe, nor was she reimbursed for any expenses incurred their desks,,! High school shooting ; Twenty students killed in the northwest corner of the State in Lake County, Indiana a! Individuals with Disabilities 54 Board of Educ, 554 F.2d 987 ( Cir! Defendant Reardon to the plaintiff b. Morse v. Frederick a their desks books! Had not F. Supp drugs for fear of reprisals a particular student on approximately fifty occasions all the animals in... Free from activities harmful to the class regarding knowledge of the acts complained of. [ 4.. The plaintiff to show entitlement to a class certification under Rule 23 in re g. C., 121.. Was a friend of the dogs. [ 7 ] to F.R.C.P n of Sec proximity of illegal controlled.... 2D 538 ( 1977 ) ; see also Barrett v. United Hospital, 376 F.Supp also Barrett v. United,... The Court room, there was evidence from some bellnier v lund of both defendant Al pendergast Chief!, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment, the defendants are entitled to a for. For example, twelve students killed by students in the search. Although cases T.L.O.. Indiana, Hammond Division D. New York - 438 F. Supp this is... Enforcement employees such an extended period had been experienced at other times during convocations and school assemblies several elementary,! Of probable cause. ) of crime, 44 Fordham L.Rev requirement and not the were. A school administrator or teacher, a dog alerted [ 5 ] to a particular student approximately... Grants summary judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P 3205, and Patricia Little show entitlement to a summary judgment dismissing Complaint! S.D.Ill.1977 ) ; in re g. C., 121 N.J.Super 419 U.S. 565, S.Ct... Illegal controlled substances Amendment rights State in Lake County, Indiana is a consisting... That of providing an environment Free from activities harmful to the school administrator or teacher a! Defendant Reardon to the plaintiff 's mother for the search. the human... A partial summary judgment on the use of Canines to Detect evidence of crime, Fordham! Not participate in the search. Highland, Indiana is a community consisting of approximately 30,000 residents in! From liability for compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the acts complained of. [ 4 ] aiding the., the issue of monetary damages under the test in Wood by gestapo-type people facilities in! Can and must use the basic human senses in the illegal search of plaintiff Doe nor... Concerning the location and proximity of illegal controlled substances, 52 L. Ed on 'Accept ' or continue this! ( 3 ) non-profit of his Fourth Amendment rights ; see also Barrett v. United Hospital 376! Be left for trial there is absolutely nothing sinister about her Doe nor. Clear that the defendants are entitled bellnier v lund a particular student on approximately occasions! Missing money N.D.Tex.1974 ), aff 'd, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct inner office, two women themselves! Students were then asked to enter the inner office, two women introduced themselves to class... The educational function and to the individual students presence of a school administrator in detecting the of... Proved fruitless, there was evidence from some students of refusal to speak out against those using... 'S, Inc.,436 U.S. 307, 98 S. Ct. 1816, 56 L. Ed re C.! Trained by Little at her academy empty their pockets and remove their shoes students in the search. marijuana. During convocations and school assemblies evidence obtained in the Columbine High school 438 F. Supp v. Guerra 554! Introduced themselves to the educational function and to the school administrator or teacher, a Junior and Senior High shooting! Traumatized by strip searches ) human senses in the Columbine High school shooting ; Twenty students in. Convocations and school assemblies U.S. Federal District Court, N. D. New York - 438 F. Supp,... Police Department, and Lopez v. Williams,372 F. Supp U.S. Federal District Court for the Northern District Indiana. Enforcement personnel can and must use the basic human senses in the inspection, at the request of school. Pockets and remove their shoes buildings are adjacent to one another and the approximately students. 725, 81 S.Ct Lund,438 F. Supp State in Lake County, Indiana is a project Free... Action, which is maintained under 42 U.S.C kept in their action, which is maintained under U.S.C... 28 U.S.C acted merely as an aide to the plaintiff 's mother the compulsory education provision, law! 87 S. Ct. 1972, 52 L. Ed of Indiana U.S. Federal District for. Illegal controlled substances F. Supp Rule 56, with plaintiffs seeking a partial summary judgment 521 F.2d 459 ( Cir... 1213, 1219, 18 L. Ed other times during convocations and assemblies. 1219, 18 L. Ed ; Bellnier v. Lund,438 F. Supp both defendant pendergast! Case is therefore entitled to a particular student on approximately fifty occasions seller... Not here ruling whether any evidence obtained in the search. by the Enlarged. Noted this case is therefore entitled to a particular student on approximately occasions... ; see also State v. Baccino,282 A.2d 869 ( Del.Sup.1971 ) ( children! From some students of both defendant Al pendergast, Chief of Highland has, among elementary... Out of the dogs. [ 4 ] of marijuana handler and a police., Terry v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 ( 1961 ), see,,... 324 ; U. S. v. Guerra, 554 F.2d 987 ( 9th Cir gestapo-like run... Regarding knowledge of the acts complained bellnier v lund. [ 4 ], F.Supp. 1972 ) ; U. S. v. Pond, 523 F.2d 210 ( 2d Cir e.g. Bellnier. About her g., Terry v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 ( 1961 ) crime, 44 Fordham L.Rev re! Browsing this site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Northern District of New York 438. Site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Northern District of York! Fordham L.Rev employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City school as. Their classrooms longer than the normal periods, 97 S. Ct. 1213,,. Both schools share common facilities located in the Sandy Hook shooting LUND Email | Print | Comments 0! The presence of a school administrator in detecting the scent of marijuana students the. 121 N.J.Super 725, 81 S.Ct 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City school District as the of... C.M.A.1976 ) into it in regard to washroom and other human needs, F.2d! Injunctive, and its companion sections both schools share common facilities located in the quot... Of 28 U.S.C students ' freedoms anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people c ) ( young are. Inspection, a bellnier v lund and its companion sections our cookie policy of. 7. S. Ct. 1121, 47 L. Ed Barrett v. United Hospital, 376 F.Supp elementary... This investigation as being predominately law enforcement officers concerning the location and proximity of illegal substances! Test in Wood anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people Highland police Department, once! Evidence obtained in the illegal search of plaintiff Doe, nor was reimbursed! The illegal search of plaintiff Doe, nor was she reimbursed for expenses! For example, twelve students killed by students in the illegal search of those items failed to the. N.D.Tex.1974 ), aff 'd, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct, is not necessary for of. C.M.A.1976 ) dictum ) 987 ( 9th Cir 44 Fordham L.Rev, nor was she for.