The Reasonableness Model - Special Needs Flashcards
Types of Special Needs We Covered
1) Roadblocks
2) Non-police Searches
3) Routine DNA Collections
The Standard for Roadblock Stops
Safety + regularized procedures
What is allowed for Roadblocks?
-Drunk driving stops
What kind of Roadblock Stops are not ok?
1) Drug Stops -because Safety is not the primary concern
2) Investigations (like the hit and run case - police were seeking information, those stopped were not the Targets of an Investigation)
3) Stops selected at police discretion
Roadblocks: Manner in which they should be conducted
-You can survive a checkpoint case if you can develop a system to take the discretion away from the officers
2 Step Analysis for Special Needs Cases:
i. Step 1
a) Has govt articulated a special need beyond traditional law enforcement?
ii. Step 2
a) Balancing interests
What Interests must be balanced in Special Needs Cases?
i) How important is govt interest and public interest
ii) Effectiveness/fit
iii) Degree of individual interests
Like in TLO, can a school principal search a Student’s bag for drugs?
“[S]chool officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority.”
School Officials Searching Take-Away
§ Not law enforcement searching
§ Lower expectation of privacy In schools
What kind of School official Searches go too far?
Strip Searches
- “search measures used by school officials to root out contraband must be “reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.”
Can students be drug tested?
§ Can drug test students that voluntarily join extracurricular competitive activities
Can a State have a Statute that makes drug tests mandatory for those seeking public office?
No
- “Special need for drug testing must be substantial-important enough to override the individual’s acknowledged privacy interest, sufficiently vital to suppress the Fourth Amendment’s normal requirement of individualized suspicion.”
Where are we going to draw the line for Special Needs Searches?
A policy that permits searches where the purpose served is “ultimately indistinguishable form the general interest in crime control” does not comport with the Fourth Amendment.
-Pay attention to purpose and law enforcement involvement in special needs
Like in Ferguson Case, a state hospital’s performance of a diagnostic test to obtain evidence of a patient’s criminal conduct for law enforcement purposes is…
Unreasonable if the patient has not consented to the search
Government Reasons for DNA Collection
One. ID arrestee Two. Figure out criminal history Three. Safety Four. Figure out bail Five. Free wrongly convicted
Limits to DNA Collection
i. They can only do swabbing after Gerstein hearing
ii. Serious arrestees are the only ones where this type of testing is permitted
On Exam how do we analyze DNA collection?
Skip government interest and go straight to balancing
DNA Swabbing Case, King, holding:
When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold a suspect for a serious offense and bring him to the station to be detained in custody, taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee’s DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
Balancing of Interests for Cheek Swabbing for DNA in King
“In light of the context of a valid arrest supported by probable cause respondent’s expectations of privacy were not offended by the minor intrusion of a brief swab of his cheeks. By contrast, that same context of arrest gives rise to significant state interests in identifying respondent not only so that the proper name can be attached to his charges but also so that the criminal justice system can make informed decisions concerning pretrial custody. Upon these considerations the Court concludes that DNA identification of arrestees is a reasonable search that can be considered part of a routine booking procedure.
