Lynne - very good answer.

Agreed, the TLO ruling means that the search has to be within in
the scope of the rule being broken, reasonable suspicion exists
and other infractions/rule violations maybe added if during the
search they are uncovered. However, once you find the evidence of
the original rule breaking the search has to cease as you cannot
"fish" for more. Also, the search has to be commensurate with the
rule violation. Now that one is a fine line being tested in courts.

The issue in TLO was that smoking was the charge and the search
was within the scope of the rule being broken but along the way
contraband items were found and led to additional disciplinary
consequences. The argument was that the school wasn't accusing
her of drug usage therefore the search/finding of the contraband
items was not constitutional.

Also - pending your state laws a call to police and state child
protection agency may also be required as mandated reporter. It
is possible that both the picture taker/sender has committed
dissemination of cld prn as well as anyone else who sends the
picture along. Just receiving the picture may not be grounds for
a violation/breaking the law as it could have been received
unsolicited. They however maybe required to report receipt of the
picture. Interestingly, the owner of the phone may actually be
the offender pending how the law is written. For instance, phones
for many minors is bought by and bills paid by the parent.

Gee, sounds like I have experience with this issue??

Your school rules/consequences may or may not apply depending the
connection/nexus to the school environment and if you can make a
case for "substantial or material disruption to the school
environment." Tinker v. Des Moines

Cell phones - searches have to be contained to the scope of the
violation. If your school has a policy on use (ex. turned off and
not used during the day) then if it is alleged/credible report the
phone was being used, a search has to be limited to seeing if it
was used. Looking at the content of message or phone directories
would be out of bounds. If pictures were being taken in school
then the search would be limited to if pictures on the phone were
taken at school. Once the picture at school is found then my
understanding is that the search ceases but other things found
along the way may be pursued.

On 3/09/10, lynne/ca wrote:
> On 3/09/10, Wendell wrote:
>> Scenario: As an administrator, your counselor comes to you
>> and says that a female student sent a naked "crotch shot" to
>> a male student via cell phone and that the male student was
>> showing the picture and sending it to others.
>>
>> Question: If I get a report of drugs, alcohol, weapons, or
>> whatever, I can legally search a student and/ or locker,
>> backpack, trapper keeper, etc as long as I have reasonable
>> suspicion and keep the search within reasonable scope. What
>> about a cell phone? Can we legally "search" the contents of
>> a cell phone?
>
> Yes, if there is reasonable suspicion; the New Jersey v TLO
> decision applies the same as it does for other searches.

More | Report Post

Next Post >>

Posts on this thread, including this one