It is entirely possible that there was reasonable suspicion, and even probable cause, based upon the facts, to believe that someone in the classroom has possession of the stolen money. T.L.O., 469 U.S. at 337, 105 S.Ct. * Enter a valid Journal (must

at 674, 97 S. Ct. at 1414 (Emphasis Added). 342 (2d Dist.1990) (upholding search of five or six students when one student in the group reportedly had a gun). Compare United States v. Doe, 819 F.2d 206 (9th Cir. See Vernonia Sch. 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 plaintiff sued for money damages. However, we point out that the United States Supreme Court has never decided a case which involved a strip search of students, nor did the T.L.O. Viewing the totality of the circumstances in the T.L.O. An appeal by defendant Reardon to the class regarding knowledge of the missing money proved fruitless. at 740 ("closed purse or other bag"; emphasis added). 1970); In re G., 11 Cal.App.3d 1193, 90 Cal.Rptr. At some point after the search was completed, the principal of Granby High School, Michael Caprio, was consulted and told of Lee's understanding of the situation.

The plaintiffs have prayed for three forms of relief, seeking a declaratory judgment, damages, and an injunction. at 743 n. 8. 1868, 1879, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)). This Court holds that, while there need not be a showing of probable cause in a case such as this, there must be demonstrated the existence of some articulable facts which together provided reasonable grounds to search the students, and that the search must have been in furtherance of a legitimate purpose with respect to which school officials are empowered to act, such as the maintenance of discipline or the detection and punishment of misconduct. 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. First, the Court established the broad proposition that the Fourth Amendment applies to minor students attending public school. In fact, the Supreme Court most recently struck down a Georgia law requiring that candidates for political office undergo drug testing, reasoning that the governmental interest in testing candidates not suspected of any wrongdoing was not strong enough the suppress the "Fourth Amendment's normal requirement of individualized suspicion."

August 12th, 1993, Precedential Status: First, the Court said it was evident that "the school setting requires some easing of the restrictions to which searches by public authorities are usually subject. 775 (Ct. of App., 1st Dist. United States District Court, N. D. New York. 1980), cert. 1972); In re G.C., 121 N.J. Super. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated in connection with a search of high school students' backpacks at Granby High School on May 2, 1997. 791 (S.D.N.Y.1974), aff'd, 506 F.2d 1395 (2d Cir. However, the State maintains that the search was not arbitrary or malicious, and was "performed in the furtherance of Sanders' duty to maintain an educational environment as free from crime as possible. In any event, the Court sees no reason for enjoining conduct which has heretofore been declared as unlawful. Resolution of this question, however, is not necessary for purposes of this motion. 1077, 1095-1099 (1991). of Virginia, Richmond, VA, Frank Morris Feibelman, Richmond, VA, for Plaintiff. Id. Defendants motion will be denied as to declaratory and injunctive relief. Spence v. Staras, 507 F.2d 554 (7th Cir. 1031, 85 L.Ed. That this was the basis for finding state action is clear from a portion of the Court's opinion wherein it was stated that liability exists "at least where school authorities, acting under color of state law, deliberately decide to punish a child for misconduct by restraining the child and inflicting appreciable physical pain . 739 (1974); see, e.g., Tinker v. Des Moines School District, supra ( First Amendment), and In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 87 S.Ct. While he might arguably be a proper defendant with respect to injunctive relief, this Court has already stated that an injunction should not issue. The missing $100 was in the back of the appellant's underwear. The plaintiff thus seeks monetary recovery against the principal of the school, Michael Caprio, only.

§§ 1981 et seq. at 340, 105 S. Ct. at 742. Second, the AHS defendants point out in their summary judgment motion that Forrest Burnham, the only plaintiff allegedly subjected to a magic marker search, testified at his deposition that he was not searched for magic markers.

682 (Ct. of App., 4th Dist. Accordingly, this Court enjoins the school board from punishing Jim DesRoches for his refusal to consent to the search. There are few federal cases dealing with the subject of student strip searches, and unfortunately those cases are all distinguishable from that at bar. A search's reasonableness must be judged at its inception. Von Raab, 489 U.S. at 674, 109 S. Ct. at 1395 (noting the difficulty of detecting drug impairment and that it was not "feasible" to monitor Customs Employees closely); Skinner, 489 U.S. at 631, 109 S. Ct. at 1421 (reasoning that imposing *548 an individualized suspicion requirement in the aftermath of a train accident would impede investigative efforts and would result in the loss or deterioration of the evidence); Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. at 557, 96 S. Ct. at 3082-83 (noting that "[a] requirement that stops on major routes inland always be based on reasonable suspicion would be impractical ..."); Camara, 387 U.S. at 537, 87 S. Ct. at 1735 (observing "it is doubtful that any other canvassing technique would have acceptable results").

Sanchez, Expelling the Fourth Amendment from American Schools: Students' Rights Six Years After T.L.O., 21 J.L. [1] Lee called in a security officer to perform the searches. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here. In its opinion, the Supreme Court established several basic principles applicable to school searches. Lee then decided to conduct a search of all the backpacks belonging to the students in the art class. the Fourth Amendment imposes no irreducible requirement of such suspicion."

§ 1331, 1343(3) and 1343(4). In December 1986, during a regular class period at AHS, West announced that he had discovered defacement of school property, and directed the teachers to search students' bookbags, pockets, and pocketbooks for magic markers. See Camara, 387 U.S. at 536-37, 87 S. Ct. at 1735 (noting that "there can be no ready test for determining reasonableness other than by balancing the need to search against the invasion which the search entails"). This Court finds the reasoning utilized in Moore v. Student Affairs Committee of Troy State University, supra, and State v. Young, supra, that of applying the Fourth Amendment but with a lesser standard than probable cause with respect to student searches, to be the more persuasive. Opinion for Rone v. Daviess County Bd.