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: 66924 Find in a Library
Title: SEARCH AND SEIZURE - APPLYING THE WARRANT REQUIREMENT TO PAROLEE SEARCHES
Journal: WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW  Volume:14  Issue:6  Dated:(DECEMBER 1978)  Pages:1207-1223
Author(s): K P ANDRESEN
Corporate Author: Wake Forest University
School of Law
United States of America
Date Published: 1978
Page Count: 17
Sponsoring Agency: Wake Forest University
Winston-Salem, NC 27109
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THE 1978 RULING IN U.S. V. BRADLEY THAT A PAROLE OFFICER NEEDED TO SECURE A WARRANT BEFORE SEARCHING A PAROLEE MARKS A MAJOR SHIFT IN PAROLEE'S FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS.
Abstract: PRIOR TO THE BRADLEY CASE, COURTS HAVE PERMITTED A PAROLE OFFICER TO SUBJECT PAROLEES TO WARRANTLESS SEARCHES UNDER REASONABLE CIRCUMSTANCES. THE PAROLE CONDITIONS OF GEORGE BRADLEY ALLOWED THE PAROLE OFFICER TO VISIT HIS HOME OR PLACE OF WORK, BUT DID NOT SPECIFY SEARCHES. ACTING ON AN INFORMANT'S TIP, THE PAROLE OFFICER SEARCHED BRADLEY'S APARTMENT AND FOUND A LOADED FIREARM. BRADLEY APPEALED HIS CONSEQUENT CONVICTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERAL FIREARMS LAWS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE SEARCH WAS UNLAWFUL. THE COURT RULED THAT HIS FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS HAS BEEN VIOLATED AND COMMENTED THAT THE STANDARD OF CAUSE NECESSARY TO OBTAIN A SEARCH WARRANT FOR A PAROLEE NEED NOT BE AS RIGOROUS AS FOR AN ORDINARY CITIZEN. SOME COURTS HAVE FOUND THAT THE PAROLEE AND PAROLE OFFICER HAVE A SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE THE PAROLEE TECHNICALLY REMAINS IN CUSTODY AND THE PAROLE OFFICER HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY. OTHER DECISIONS HAVE PLACED THE PAROLEE'S STATUS CLOSER TO THAT OF AN ORDINARY CITIZEN THAT AN INMATE, BUT HAVE NOT SPECIFICALLY DEFINED PAROLEE'S RIGHTS. SUPREME COURT RULINGS ON WARRANTLESS ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCHES AND THEIR APPLICATIONS TO CRIMINAL LAW ARE DISCUSSED. IN LATTA V. FITZHARRIS, THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANALOGIZED PAROLEE SEARCHES TO ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCHES, STATING THAT PAROLEES ARE SSUBJECT TO CERTAIN REGULATIONS AND EXPECT A DIMINISHED DEGREE OF PRIVACY. THE STATE ALSO HAS AN INTEREST IN CONDUCTING UNANNOUNCED UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. THE BRADLEY COURT REJECTED THIS ANALOGY AS WELL AS THE SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP THEORY. IT NOTED THAT ABUSES OF DISCRETION ARE BETTER PREVENTED BY PRIOR JUDICIAL APPROVAL THAN JUDICIAL REVIEW AFTER THE FACT. THE BRADLEY DECISION AGREES WITH ANOTHER RECENT SUPREME COURT OPINION AND IS LIKELY TO INFLUENCE NEW POLICIES CONCERNING PAROLEE RIGHTS. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (MJM)
Index Term(s): Judicial decisions; Parole conditions; Parolees rights; Probation or parole officers; Right of privacy; Search and seizure laws; Warrantless search
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66924

*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.