Preview

New Jersey vs. T.L.O.: Illegal Search

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
451 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
New Jersey vs. T.L.O.: Illegal Search
New Jersey vs. T.L.O
The Supreme Court has a long history of upholding citizens' protections against unreasonable searches and seizures a right guaranteed by the 4th Amendment. In 1914, the Court ruled that evidence obtained by police illegally is not admissible in federal court a practice known as the exclusionary rule. In 1980, a teacher at Piscataway High School in Middlesex County, New Jersey, found T.L.O. and another girl smoking in a restroom a place that was by school rule a nonsmoking area. The two girls were taken to the principal's office where T.L.O.'s friend admitted that she had been smoking in the restroom. T.L.O. denied smoking there. She denied that she smoked at all. An assistant vice-principal demanded to see T.L.O.'s purse. Searching through it he found a pack of cigarettes. He also found rolling papers, a pipe, marijuana, a large wad of dollar bills, and two letters that indicated that T.L.O. was involved in marijuana dealing at the high school. T.L.O. was taken to the police station where she confessed that she had sold marijuana at the school. A juvenile court sentenced her to a year's probation. The State Supreme Court overturned the decision, stating that T.L.O.'s 4th Amendment rights had been violated. But White agreed with a lower court finding that a “school official may properly conduct a search of a student's person if the official has a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed or reasonable cause to believe that the search is necessary to maintain school discipline….” In other words, in a school, a search could be reasonable under the 4th Amendment without probable cause, so long as it was supported by reasonable suspicion or reasonable cause. The assistant vice-principal's search was considered reasonable under this definition. In 1985, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 margin, ruled that New Jersey and the school had met a "reasonableness" standard for conducting such searches at school. The high court

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    A teacher found two girls smoking in the bathroom in a school located in New Jersey. Upon arrival to the principal’s office for disciplinary actions, one of the girls admitted to smoking, while the other (whose initials are T.L.O.) denied any wrongdoing. The principal ended up searching the girl’s purse which contained evidence to prove she was smoking in the bathroom along with marijuana paraphernalia. She eventually admitted to using this paraphernalia for selling marijuana in school. Using the evidence found within the purse and the confession, she was charged and taken into juvenile court where she was eventually sentenced to a year’s probation. T.L.O argued that her 4th amendment rights had been violated…

    • 263 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 2002, Lemon Montrea Johnson was the passenger in the backseat of a car stopped for a traffic violation. Johnson was charged with; inter alia, possession of drugs and possession of a weapon by a felon. These items were discovered during a protective pat-down search of Johnson. Johnson was convicted by the trial court. Johnson argued that his conviction should be overturned because the trial court was in error by denying his motion to suppress the evidence. He argued that he had been unlawfully “seized” because being a passenger in a vehicle does not automatically constitute “seizure.” He furthered argued that even if he had been “seized,” that by the time Officer Trevizo searched him he was no longer “seized” as their conversation had become consensual. Furthermore, the evidence should not be considered because the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights and because the…

    • 4995 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This case brings the question up of was T.LO's rights broken or not. The fourth amendment is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. T.L.O is the person who sued because she felt that the contents in her bag were only found because it was searched unlawfully. In Juvenile Court it was decided that there had been no Fourth Amendment violation. T.L.O was searched without probably cause of any illegal activity. The fact that she was smoking cigarettes in school have the principle no reason to think she is dealing marijuana.…

    • 314 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    case study

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Supreme Court Decision: The search was unreasonable under the 4th and 14th amendments. In arresting officer may search only the area “within the immediate control" of the person arrested, meaning the area from which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. Any other search of the surrounding area requires a search warrant.…

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    After this discovery he continued to search the purse thoroughly and found some marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, money, an index card containing a list of students who owed TLO money, and two letters that signaled her in marijuana dealing. So everything being discovered now will be used against her in court. After the discovering of these items in TLO purse she was taken to the Juvenile Court and received delinquency charges which,in court TLO tried to say that her 4th Amendment was violated but the court said the search conducted by the Vice Principal was reasonable because TLO was a delinquent. On the contrary The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court came to the conclusion that there was a Fourth Amendment violation. The New Jersey Supreme Court said, holding that the search of the purse was unreasonable. She was sentenced to one year probation and brought up on charges by the local authorities. Though the Supreme Court did not say that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to students. The Fourth Amendment states that a search and seizure cannot be lawfully conducted without a warrant or probable cause. However, in a school setting, a search is considered to be reasonable and within the constraints of the Fourth Amendment if there is reasonable suspicion…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Criminal justice deals with individuals who are suspect to be criminals or affiliated with one. The main purpose of criminal law is to ensure that those who break the law will in return be punished. Mapp v Ohio became one of many cases in the criminal procedure that made a huge impact on the fourth amendment in regards to how law enforcement officials could not use evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment in trial. Long story short, Dollree Mapp was convicted of having obscene materials after police conducted an illegal search of her home for a fugitive. What I took from the case was that the facts were pretty straight forward. The evidence obtained from the police was illegally acquired in Ms. Mapps house. This is because…

    • 133 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Mapp V. Ohio Case Study

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Justice Black also believes the command that no unreasonable searches or seizures be allowed is too little to infer such a large decision. With these differences aside Justice Black feels that along with previous court decisions that the "Fourth Amendment's ban against unreasonable searches and seizures is considered together with the Fifth Amendment's ban against compelled self-incrimination, a constitutional basis emerges which not only justifies, but actually requires the exclusionary…

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    In this paper I’m going to detail the judicial process of a Supreme Court case, which was the first of its kind. The Supreme Court did not have original jurisdiction over this case. It traveled through each juridical system before reaching the Supreme Court. This case was of interest to them, not to question it the defendant was guilty, but were his constitutional rights violated in the process of prosecuting him. This case began with an anonymous tip that the defendant was growing illegal contraband at his home. The DEA assigned Detective Padraja and Detective Bartelt to sit on the home. After making the decision that no one was home the…

    • 1003 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In 1914, Weeks v. United States was decided by the Supreme Court. In Weeks, the Court made a landmark decision relating to illegal search and seizure by law enforcement called the Exclusionary Rule. The Exclusionary Rule provided that evidence “illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.” (Exclusionary Rule, 2010, p. 287). However, it was not until the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio that the Court made the Exclusionary Rule binding on the states…

    • 1210 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    To protect the American peoples 4th Amendment right “against unreasonable searches and seizures” from law enforcement using illegally seized evidence in a criminal trial against them, the exclusionary rule was created. The U.S. Supreme Court deemed any evidence illegally obtained inadmissible in a criminal trial, and any other evidence obtained during an illegal search and seizure inadmissible as well. This is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.…

    • 197 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Terry Stop Case Study

    • 2397 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Though the trial court rejected the prosecution theory that the guns had been seized during a search incident to a lawful arrest, the court denied the motion to suppress and admitted the weapons into evidence on the ground that the officer had cause to believe that Terry and Chilton were acting suspiciously, that their interrogation was warranted, and that the officer, for his own protection, had the right to pat down their outer clothing having reasonable cause to believe that they might be armed. The court distinguished between an investigatory "stop" and an arrest, and between a "frisk" of the outer clothing for weapons and a full-blown search for evidence of crime. Terry and Chilton were found guilty, an intermediate appellate court affirmed, and the State Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that "no substantial constitutional question" was…

    • 2397 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Case Of Charles Katz

    • 787 Words
    • 4 Pages

    New Jersey v. TLO, 469 U.S. 325 (1985), student bag was search and the Fourth Amendment did not apply to her even though it was her personal bag and expectation of privacy was high but due to her being on public property she lost her right to privacy. She was prosecuted but he was able to get his evidence…

    • 787 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    When law enforcement or an government agency take it upon themselves to enter someone home or search a vehicle without a valid search warrant they are violating that persons Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. Evidence that could be admissible in a case may be excluded from trial if it is gather as a resulted from an illegal search or some other constitutional violation. The exclusionary rule prevents the use of most evidence gathered illegally. The rule can also be triggered by law enforcement violations of a person’s Fifth or Sixth Amendments right as well. I feel that is the case as it contains to John Smith and the search of his…

    • 115 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Firstly, the students see the searches of their lockers is an invasion of property given by the school itself "The biggest drawback to a school locker search is the lack of trust students may feel as a result of actions they see as an invasion of privacy. Because students may keep personal items in their lockers, such as photographs and personal letters, even a search with the best intentions can appear to be a major breach of trust by teachers and administrators, causing a rift between the student body and the faculty" (classroom-synonym) the evidence states that the searches would be negative in many ways. First being a violation of the 4th amendment, and second, searches decrease the trust between teacher and students in an environment where the teachers require the students to trust them. In addition, the students feel that it is a violation of their privacy. Students question why they are being targeted. Some schools say that the lockers are their property, however backpacks are the students’ private property, but schools state that whatever comes to school, the teachers are obliged to search if reasonable (classroom-synonym). In the case of New Jersey v T.L.O, although the bag was owned by…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the landmark case Mapp v. Ohio the United States Supreme Court ruled that any evidence obtained during an illegal search and seizure was a violation of the 4th Amendment, which protects Americans from “unreasonable search and seizures.” Because of this ruling all illegal evidence obtained is inadmissible in court. Mapp v. Ohio became a precedent for law enforcement and in a court of law. The ruling officially established the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule was created to protect Americans from our very own law enforcement and courts.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays