COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS STUDENT'S FOURTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS OF IMPROPER SCHOOL SEARCH
In a minor's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 civil rights lawsuit alleging defendants violated her Fourth Amendment rights by conducting a warrantless search of her person during school hours and on school premises, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed as defendants did not violate her Fourth Amendment rights.
What happened?
The Safford Middle School in Safford, Arizona, has instItuted a policy of prohibiting the "non-medical use, possession, or sale of drugs on school property or at school events." Sounds fair.
In 2003, during a school dance, some teachers noticed a group of students exhibiting "unusually rowdy" behavior, and decided to investigate. The plaintiff, April Redding, was amongst them.
Staffers detected the smell of alcohol coming from the group, and later found a bottle of alcohol and a pack of cigarettes in the girls' restroom.
About five weeks later, another student - Jordan - became violent with his mother. Jordan explained that he had taken some pills that a classmate had given him. Guess what? He named plaintiff April Redding as one of the perpetrators. He also named "Marissa."
Based on this information, the vice principal collected Marissa from her class and picked up a planner that Marissa denied was hers. Oops. The planner contained knives, lighters and a cigarette. Marissa turned out her pockets at the principal's request, and out came one blue pill, several white pills and a razor blade. Marissa tattled to the principal that April Redding had provided her the blue pill. It was ultimately determined to be Ibuprofin.
Marissa was taken into the nurse's office where she was required to lift up her shirt and show her bra band, take off her pants and pull out the elastic of her underwear, and remove her shoes and socks. No more drugs or weapons were found.
April Redding was then collected, and denied Marissa's allegations. Redding complied with a search of her backpack, which yielded nothing. She also agreed to go to the nurse's office to be searched. She was required to pull her underwear out at the crotch and shake it. Redding was never touched. Her mother was not called prior to the search.
The district court granted the school's motion for summary judgment stating that it was within the permission scope of New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 341 (1985).
The Ninth Circuit held that officials justified the search at its inception because they had "reasonable grounds" for suspecting Redding had violated the law. They had several key pieces of information pointing to the suspecin that Redding was supplying drugs to students.
In discussing the issue of student "informants", the Ninth Circuit admitted that while law on this subject is sparse, there is sufficient case law discussing the reliabiity of student informants. (Phaneuf v. Fraiken, 448 F.3d 591, 597-99 (2d cir. 2006); Williams v. Ellington, 936 F.2d 881, 888 (6th Cir. 1991)
As to the scope of the search, the court considered: 1) the importance of the governmental interest at stake (searches for drugs will be more permissive than searches for money); 2) the size of the contraband to be found; 3) the physical setting and circumstances surrounding a search.
Additionally, the Court concluded that based on the privacy of the nurse's room, the fact that Redding was not touched, and that she was permitted to get dressed immediately, the search was reasonable.
The Court rejected Reddings assertions that the search had to be conducted using the least restrictive means. School officials were not requird to contact Redding's mother, or have her remove her clothing behind a screen.
Dissenting in this opinion was Circuit Judge Thomas, who pointed out that a nude search of a thirteen-year-old child where she was ordered to expose her breasts and her pubic area, constituted "an invasion of constitutional rights of some magnitude" and "[a] violation of any known principle of human dignity." He dismissed the majority's positon that the informant was credible, noting that at most, Redding was alleged to have provided ibuprofin to other students.
As seen here, The "reasonableness" of searches of juveniles rests primarily on the facts of each case. The goal-oriented majority here bypasses the magnitude of the search in order to uphold it's legality.
Redding v. Safford Unified School District et al; 2-21-07 U.S.D.C. (D-Az); 9th Cir. No:05-15759
