skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 201464 Find in a Library
Title: Probationers, Parolees, and the Fourth Amendment
Journal: FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin  Volume:72  Issue:7  Dated:July 2003  Pages:22-31
Author(s): Thomas D. Colbridge J.D.
Date Published: July 2003
Page Count: 10
Sponsoring Agency: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: HTML
Type: Instructional Material; Legislation/Policy Analysis
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article explores the extent to which probationers and parolees are protected by the restrictions of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches.
Abstract: Courts tend not to distinguish between parolees and probationers when analyzing their Fourth Amendment protections, so the principles discussed in this article apply to both. From a review of court cases concerning searches of the person or locations of probationers and parolees, it is clear that probationers and parolees, as well as their residences, vehicles, and personal effects, are granted Fourth Amendment protection. Consequently, any search of probationers and parolees or their property must be reasonable; however, reasonable searches do not include the usual requirement of a search warrant based upon probable cause. Probation and parole officers as well as police officers may search probationers' and parolees' homes and property so long as they have reasonable suspicion to believe that contraband is present or criminal activity is occurring. Whether probationers and parolees may be searched without a specific reason remains an open question. It is likely unwise to attempt to justify searches absent suspicion on the theory of consent. States can argue that "suspicionless" searches of probationers and parolees are reasonable regulations or conditions, because the searches are not a function of law enforcement and are reasonably related to the two goals of rehabilitation and public protection. Also, it is plausible to argue that the inherent nature of probation and parole combined with search conditions imposed as a requirement for release are sufficient to extinguish any reasonable expectation of privacy that probationers and parolees may have. Resolution of the issue of a "suspicionless" search, however, must await clear word from the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has made clear that so long as the searches themselves are reasonable, it will not inquire into the actual motivations of officers conducting them. In regulatory or administrative reviews, courts will first determine whether the conditions of the search are reasonably related to the goals of the parole or probation system and then consider whether officers complied with them. 73 notes
Main Term(s): Corrections policies
Index Term(s): Parolees; Parolees rights; Probation or parole officer training; Probationers; Probationers rights; Search and seizure; Search and seizure laws; Search and seizure training; Search warrants; US Supreme Court decisions; Warrantless search
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.