<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>4th amendment case studies by EConcepcion 59426</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj</link>
      <description>Law uno</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2016-10-27 15:27:40 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2016-10-31 15:36:19 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>Veronica School District vs. Acton (1995)</title>
         <author>econcepcion59426</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133662350</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Veronica School District started a  drug use policy which forces athletes to drug test through urine samples.<br>2. The issue was if the district was allowed to drug test students because it may violate their 4th amendment rights (search and seizure).<br>3,4,5. The court decided that the actions by the Veronica School District did not violate the students 4th amendment rights because  the high school athletes who are under State supervision during school hours are subject to greater control than over free adults and the governmental concern over the safety of minors under their supervision overrides the minimal, if any, intrusion in student-athletes' privacy.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2016-10-27 15:33:21 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133662350</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Safford unified school district vs. Redding</title>
         <author>hfillipp57650</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133662868</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Savana Redding was a student at&nbsp; Safford Middle School, she was going against Safford unified school.&nbsp;<br>2. The school had reason to believe Redding was selling over counter pills and called her into the office and had a strip search.&nbsp;<br>3. The mother of Redding says that the strip search violated Savana's fourth amendment right against unreasonable searches and the court was asked to decide if the search was unlawful.&nbsp;<br>4. the court decided the case by looking at both sides of the story and looking at what the students rights were in the school<br>5. the court found that the school did not have the right to do a strip search on the student. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2016-10-27 15:34:30 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133662868</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) </title>
         <author>jgonzalez63169</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133663103</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. The 2 parties involved in the New Jersey v. T.L.O case were Tracy Lois Odem and the state of New Jersey <br>2. The key event that took place was when Tracy and another girl were caught smoking in the bathroom and taken to the vice principle office where the other girl confessed but Tracy Denied it .A search was done by the vice principle were he found the cigarettes but continued searching and found a small amount of marijuana, rolling papers, a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_pipe_(tobacco)">pipe</a>, empty plastic bags, a large quantity of money in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_one-dollar_bill">$5 bills</a>, an index card that appeared to list students who owed TLO money, and two letters that implicated TLO in dealing marijuana.<br>3.the courts were asked to determine if the if the 4th amendment applied because the vice principle continued searching&nbsp; even though he found what he was looking for.<br>4,5.the courts decided that the 4th amendment did not apply because their was reasonable suspicion and the other items were in plain view <br>6. The Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures applies to searches conducted by public school officials (administrators).<br><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_v._T._L._O.">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_v._T._L._O.</a><br>by: Jose Gonzalez</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2016-10-27 15:35:03 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133663103</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Weeks v. United States (1914)</title>
         <author>jsoto68007</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133663473</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1.Fremont weeks the plaintiff and defendant who was hired by an express company was convicted of transporting lottery tickets.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2.Weeks was convicted of using mails for transporting lottery tickets which was a violation of the criminal code, when he got arrested the polices went to his house to search it and one of weeks neighbors told them were to find the key so they entered the house without a warrant and took papers and articles of his which was turned in to the U.S. marshals, the next day they returned but with the marshal still without a warrant.&nbsp; 3.The legal issue was that the officers were entering Weeks house and taking thing like papers and documents with out a warrant.                                       4.The court used the papers and documents to convict Weeks of transporting the tickets though mail. 5.the court reached that decision because of the proof they had in the papers they got from his house illegally.&nbsp;</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2016-10-27 15:35:53 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/econcepcion59426/aj90bv2342nj/wish/133663473</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
