Wood v. Strickland, supra, 420 U.S. at 321, 95 S. Ct. 992. *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. 1985. 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. Both public and. Such an extended period had been experienced at other times during convocations and school assemblies. State v. Young, 234 Ga. 488, 216 S.E.2d 586 (1975). of Troy State Univ., 284 F. Supp. 47, 54 (N. D. N. Y. What level of information is necessary must be determined on a case by case basis, however, this Court holds the lesser standard of a "reasonable cause to believe" applicable in such a determination. Before such a search can be performed, the school administrators must articulate some facts that provide a reasonable cause to believe the student possesses the contraband sought. Although it can be argued that the spectre of a uniformed officer may chill some vague right to movement within the school, such contention fails in light of the fact that student movement is constantly restricted for other legitimate educational purposes. 1970); In re G.,11 Cal. Little was asked to attend because she had had experience in the field of canine searches in schools.[4]. It is clear that the major thrust of plaintiffs' cause of action is based upon 42 U.S.C. The missing money was never located. Turning next to the search aspect of the Fourth Amendment, the issue becomes whether the activity of the defendants on the morning in question prior to any alert by the trained dogs was a search and, if so, whether the search, although warrantless, was reasonable. 47 (N.D.N.Y. Ala.1968). 2d 790 (1975); Note, School and School Officials, 78 W.Va.L.Rev. at 999-1001; see also Picha v. Wielgos, supra. *1027 This Court finds no constitutional fault with the basic plan and program as executed. No student was treated with any malice nor was the operation planned in a way so as to embarrass any particular student. BELLNIER v. LUND Email | Print | Comments ( 0) No. 47 (N.D.N.Y. 99 (D.Me., N.D.1969); State v. Wingerd, 40 Ohio App.2d 236, 318 N.E.2d 866 (1974) (dictum); State v. Mora,307 So. 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. There is also a basic burden to demonstrate that the plaintiff will be an adequate representative of the other members of a class. 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. Fifty students were alerted to by the drug detecting canines on the morning in question. See U. S. v. Thomas, 1 M.J. at 401 (C.M.A.1976). . Transformed by Public.Resource.Org, Inc., at Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:13:27 GMT 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. [4] Renfrow requested information from the Highland Police Department concerning the use of trained canine units for the planned investigation. Cf. 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. 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. [7] Plaintiff emphasizes the occupations of the volunteer dog handlers used in this investigation as being predominately law enforcement employees. App. 556 (1973); U. S. v. Thomas, 1 M.J. 397 (C.M.A. Bellnierv. 4. Little did not have any knowledge of, or direct involvement in, the search of plaintiff, Doe. 1214 (N.D.Ill., E.D.1976), and Potts v. Wright,357 F. Supp. 452 F.Supp. Subsequent to oral argument and upon the granting of a motion to dismiss certain party *1015 plaintiffs, made by plaintiffs' counsel, only Diane Doe and her parents as next friends remain as plaintiffs in this action. United States District Court, N. D. New York. Both parties have moved for a summary judgment, pursuant to F.R.C.P. Drug use within the school became an activity the school administrator wished to eliminate. In United States v. Fulero, 162 U.S.App.D.C. BELLNIER v. LUND Email | Print | Comments (0) No. For example in Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F.Supp.47 (N.D.N.Y. 1973); U. S. v. Lewis, 392 F.2d 377 (2d Cir. 1971), with Warren v. National Ass'n of Sec. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. 733, 21 L.Ed.2d 731 (1969). She was not armed. Again, the trainer and dog were in the rooms at the request and with the permission of the school administrators. Border searches are subject to a modified probable cause requirement and are excepted from the warrant requirement. at 206, 498 F.2d at 748; Bronstein, supra, at 460; Solis, supra, at 881; Venema, supra, at 1004, 1005. 5, supra, 429 F. Supp. [13] This Court notes the state of the law is unclear as to whether the Fourth Amendment and its coordinate remedy, the Exclusionary Rule, apply in full force to searches of students. 1974). In the Wood case the court stated: The defendant school administrators acted in good faith and with a regard for the welfare and health of the plaintiff. Realizing fully that the military cases are not dispositive of or binding precedent on the issues raised here, the history of the manner in which the Court of Military Appeals has approached the problem is revealing. . Document Cited authorities 50 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related Vincent 438 F. Supp. In analyzing the search to determine reasonableness, the Court must weigh the danger of the conduct, evidence of which is sought, against the students' right of privacy and the need to protect them from the humiliation and psychological harms associated with such a search. . Subjecting a student to a nude search is more than just the mild inconvenience of a pocket search, rather, it is an intrusion into an individual's basic justifiable expectation of privacy. However, when the dog has alerted as to a particular student in the above context and that student is removed from the basic routine as above described and taken to another area of the school for a more thorough examination of the student's body and clothing, another set of constitutional values comes into play. Donate Now Interest of LLv. 1977). The pocket search was an invasion of the sphere of privacy which the Fourth Amendment protects; it was a search. Plaintiffs seek legal, injunctive, and declaratory relief in their action, which is maintained under 42 U.S.C. Buss, The Fourth Amendment and Searches of Students in Public Schools, 59 Iowa L.Rev. 4 View Case Cited Cases Citing Case Citing Cases Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Northern District of New York US Federal District Court. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Although the subject of using drug detecting canines has not been specifically addressed in this circuit, it has been analyzed in other courts. As stated by the Court in Potts. Each of the students entered the classroom and placed his outer garment in a coatroom located wholly within, and accessible only from, the classroom. Sometime that morning, and prior to the commencement of class, plaintiff Leonti complained to defendant Olson that he was missing $3.00 from his coat pocket. 47 (N.D.N.Y. This document shall constitute the Court's findings and conclusions of law as required by F.R.C.P. No. 1983 and 1985, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Waits v. McGowan, 516 F.2d 203 (3d Cir. 1832). If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. On March 23, 1979, a school wide drug inspection was conducted by the administrators of the Highland School System with the assistance of the Highland Police Department and volunteer canine units trained in marijuana detection. The boundaries of that immunity were defined in Wood as containing both objective and subjective elements. Ms. Little with her vast experience in the training of dogs was another resource. 1983. 410 (1976). 1971), with Warren v. National Ass'n of Sec. See, e. g., Education Law 3001-3020-a. This element, loosely termed as "state action", is highly amorphous, and is generally determined on a case-by-case basis after an analysis of the facts involved. Get free summaries of new Northern District of New York US Federal District Court opinions delivered to your inbox! Rule 56. 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. Each classroom teacher was instructed to keep their students in the first period class and to have them perform their customary work. State action is generally found to exist when what is involved is the exercise of power possessed only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state *51 law. 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. 5, supra. 20 pp. Picha v. Wielgos,410 F. Supp. That is to say, immunity exists if the official acts in good faith and not in ignorance or disregard of settled indisputable principles of law. The students were there ordered to strip down to their undergarments, and their clothes were searched. Although each of those cases dealt with the search of objects rather than of persons, as in this case, the same test of reasonableness applies. 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, This is an action whereby the plaintiff children, through their parents, Plaintiffs seek legal, injunctive, and declaratory relief in their action, which is maintained under, Jurisdiction is alleged to exist by virtue of. Body searches involved extensive examination of the student's clothing entailing the removal of some of the garments. 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. Various police departments were one such resource. This Court now denies plaintiff's request for certification of a class pursuant to 23(a) and (b) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Of those fifty, eleven were subject to a more extensive search of the body. People trafficking in illegal narcotics often attempt to conceal the odor. Her search was conducted in an atmosphere designed to reduce to a minimum any apprehension or embarrassment. This is an action whereby the plaintiff children, through their parents comme next friends, seek redress for an allegedly unlawful strip search claimed to have been conducted or condoned by defendants, all of whom are employed by the Auburn Enlarged City School District in one capacity or another. (It should be noted this case went off on the warrant requirement and not the existence of probable cause.). She was quietly escorted to a nurse's station in the Junior High School and was asked to remain in the waiting room. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. . and State v. See Johnson v. U. S.,333 U.S. 10, 68 S. Ct. 367, 92 L. Ed. 47 (N.D.N.Y 1977) Searches of Places Students have a limited expectation of privacy of areas such as lockers, which are owned and jointly controlled by the school. Moreover, plaintiff as well as other students in a public school, does not fall within the meaning of Katz because of the very nature of public school education. 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. The atmosphere within the Highland Junior and Senior High Schools was one of frustration on the part of school administrators and faculty brought about by their inability to control or arrest the drug use problem. Of those eleven, only three other students were subject to the unlawful nude search. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. Auth., 365 U.S. 715, 725, 81 S.Ct. 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). 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. 47 (N.D.N.Y. To suggest anything approaching that idea is to do an extreme disservice to a group of dedicated people who carry heavy legal and moral obligations for public education. Rptr. The Supreme Court established in New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1589, 43 L.Ed.2d 790 (1975); Note, School and School Officials, 78 W.Va.L.Rev. 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. Those named plaintiffs alleged that search activities conducted by certain school officials assisted by local police officers violated the plaintiffs' rights secured by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Also requested by plaintiff is a class certification of all persons who were enrolled at Highland High School and Highland Junior High School who were subject to the complained of activities or those who would be enrolled hereafter as such students in those institutions. Defendant Knox, who in December of 1974, was the Superintendent of Schools of the Auburn Enlarged City School District, has moved for a summary judgment in his favor. 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. 1428, 18 L. Ed. at 1218; Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F.Supp. at 674, 97 S. Ct. at 1414 (Emphasis Added). 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 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. A careful reading shows that the Supreme Court did specifically hold that there must be a link between the particular item sought and a suspected infraction, New Jersey v. T. L. 0., 469 U. S. at 345. 2d 731 (1969) (First Amendment protection when wearing black armbands as a form of student expression); In re Gault,387 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1428, 18 L. Ed. 1971). I.C. 47 (N.D.N.Y. The plaintiff further seeks to have the complained of activities of the named defendants permanently enjoined. 1972); In re G. C., 121 N.J.Super. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. This is an action whereby the plaintiff children, through their parents comme next friends, seek redress for an allegedly unlawful strip search claimed to have been conducted or condoned by defendants, all of whom are employed by the Auburn Enlarged City School District in one capacity or another. 791 (S.D.N.Y.1974), aff'd, 506 F.2d 1395 (2d Cir. Because of the Court's findings on the immunity of the defendant school officials, the issue of damages can be determined at this time. U. S. v. Guerra, 554 F.2d 987 (9th Cir. Cal. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received. See also W. RINGEL, SEARCHES & SEIZURES, ARRESTS AND CONFESSIONS 18.1 (1984). Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. Sometime that morning, and prior to the commencement of class, plaintiff Leonti complained to defendant Olson that he was missing $3.00 from his coat pocket. [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. And searches to prevent skyjacking are subject to a modified probable cause requirement and are excepted from the warrant requirement.