As a parent you need to know about the ever expanding right of schools to conduct searches and seizures. In some cases, a police officer employed by the school district may search your child even if such a search would be illegal if done outside of the school arena.
Everybody knows from TV that the police must generally have a warrant to search your home or a lawfully based reason to search your person; but few are aware of the exceptions to these practices. This is particularly true with school searches. In fact, there are situations where a student does not have the same right to privacy that so many of us take for granted.
As time goes on our children grow up quicker and quicker. Despite the possible benefit of quicker maturation that goes along with this reality, there is also cause for concern. Each day when we send our kids to school we place our faith in the educational system's role as caretaker. Often referred to as In Loco Parentis, schools exercise many of the same rights over their students as the parent or guardian they go home to. In fulfilling this obligation, school safety and discipline are clearly of paramount importance; and it is the school administrators who enforce these valued concerns and standards of behavior.
Most often these responsibilities are carried out by your school's administration. Which brings us back to our topic of how it applies to your children: while they are at school, are their rights the same as yours or mine out in the general public? The answer is "no!" A student's expectation of privacy is less than that which we all enjoy under the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.
While normally your child does indeed have those same protections as you or I, this is not necessarily so in school. The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that because of a heightened concern for the wellbeing of schoolchildren, those assumed protections are diminished for students while on school property. Rationales for this include the potential for violence (shown by nationally known tragedies, such as Columbine) and drug distribution-an all too frequent issue throughout educational institutions.
The primary cases involved in this area are New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 327, 105 S.CT 733, 735, 83 L.Ed.2d 720 (1985) and Coronado v. State 835 S.W.2d 636 (Tex.Crim.App-1992). The Coronado Court applied the New Jersey v. T.L.O. standard to Texas school searches. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Coronado explained:
[t]he [U.S.] Supreme Court [in New Jersey v. T.L.O.] established a two prong test to determine the reasonableness of the search. First, a court must determine whether the search was justified at its inception. A search of a student by a teacher or school official is justified at its inception when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated, or is violating, either the law or the rules of the school. Second, a court must determine whether the search, as actually conducted, was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place. A search is permissible in its scope when the measures adopted and used are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and are not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.
This two prong test lowers the bar for school administrators. The courts afford them more latitude when justifying a school search.
Since the Coronado decision, Texas schools have taken full advantage of this greater power to search students and their lockers. Indeed, under more recent case law, even police officers employed by the school district may search students under this more expansive search and seizure law as long as they are acting at the request of school officials or carried out school-mandated policies. Other newer appellate decisions have even authorized the uniform search of all students upon their arrival to school-regardless of whether a student is suspected of any misbehavior.
When there is a reasonably based suspicion that criminal behavior is afoot, school administrators may take action that includes nonconsensual search and seizure. This is a lower standard than what we as adults outside of school enjoy. While they are not given carte blanche to invade someone's physical privacy, schools are given far more latitude than traditional law enforcement officers acting on their own. If the efforts carried out by administrators do not exceed the basis for their investigation, then it is likely to be allowed.
Courts have also relied heavily on the rights tacitly given away when your child (and perhaps you) hurriedly signed his or her copy of the school's student handbook. Much of what is written in that booklet was purposely placed there by the school district's attorneys. You may want to review that handbook to help underscore the importance of your child behaving at school.
As simple as such a legal precedent sounds, add a few facts and the issue soon becomes murky. For example, what if an administrator directs an on-campus police officer to do a search on a student, or vise versa?
Normally, when an investigation is requested by an administrator, and the police officer is assigned to that school, the officer is considered to be an extension of the administration and all of the powers that that comes with. On the other hand, when a police officer instructs an administrator to carry out an investigation of a student's person or belongings the legality is more questionable. Indeed, if an officer, conducting an independent inquiry on school grounds fails to recognize rights that are normally respected, any evidence seized might be thrown out of court.
All of this serves to highlight the importance of understanding what your school's administration can or cannot do with your child. It is important to talk to an experienced San Antonio Criminal Defense Attorney who is familiar with these types of cases.