skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 66362 Find in a Library
Title: CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CANINE SEARCHES IN THE CLASSROOM
Journal: JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY  Volume:71  Issue:1  Dated:(SPRING 1980)  Pages:39-45
Corporate Author: Northwestern University
School of Law
Managing Editor
United States of America

Williams and Wilkins Co
United States of America
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 7
Sponsoring Agency: Northwestern University
Chicago, IL 60611
Williams and Wilkins Co
Baltimore, MD 21202
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF USING DOGS TO DETECT MARIJUANA ON STUDENTS IN SEARCHES OF PUBLIC SCHOOL CLASSROOMS IS DISCUSSED.
Abstract: THE DISCUSSION CENTERS ON DOE V. RENFROW, IN WHICH THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN INDIANA CONSIDERED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CLASSROOM SEARCHES IN WHICH POLICE DOGS SNIFFED STUDENTS TO DETECT MARIJUANA. THE COURT UPHELD BOTH THE USE OF THE DOGS, AND THE POCKET SEARCHES OF STUDENTS TO WHOM THE DOGS REACTED. HOWEVER, THE COURT INVALIDATED A 'NUDE SEARCH' OF A STUDENT TO WHOM A DOG CONTINUED TO REACT AFTER A POCKET SEARCH REVEALED NO MARIJUANA. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE REVIEWED IN DETAIL, TOGETHER WITH THE REASONING OF THE COURT. QUESTIONS ARE RAISED ABOUT THE COURT'S HOLDING THAT NEITHER THE MASS INSPECTION INSTIGATED BY SCHOOL OFFICIALS NOR THE USE OF DRUG-DETECTING DOGS IN THE CLASSROOM CONSTITUTES A SEARCH WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT. THE COURT'S APPROACH IN RECONCILING THE VALIDITY OF THE WARRANTLESS POCKET SEARCH WITH THE INVALIDITY OF THE NUDE SEARCH IS ALSO QUESTIONED. THE COURTS ARE URGED TO DELINEATE THE SCOPE OF FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS SO THAT SCHOOL OFFICIALS CAN DEAL WITH DRUG PROBLEMS WITHOUT INFRINGING UPON STUDENTS' RIGHTS. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.
Index Term(s): Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Drug detection; Judicial decisions; Police dogs; Public schools; Students; Warrantless search
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66362

*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.