Erin Jones

05/13/2015
English
IRAC
Safford Unified School District vs. April Redding
Savana Redding, a thirteen year-old student attending Safford Unified School District,
was accused of distributing narcotics to other students by the schools Assistant Principal
Wilson. Savana got charged with violating schools rules of having over-the-counter drugs
without the proper permission. Students who were concerned about their surroundings came to
the authorities and spoke of their concern. Jordan Romero, one of the concerned students,
came to Wilson and told him that he had received a white pill from Marissa Glines, another
student convicted of distributing narcotics. After questioning Marrissa, school officials then stripsearched her and found more white pills and a blue pill, which were both later identified by the
school nurse as painkillers, 400 mg ibuprofen and anti inflammatory drugs with a dose of 200
mg, known as naproxen. When Marissa was asked to step out of class for questioning, her
teacher handed over her planner, that was filled with knives and other school-banned items to
the officials and was later shown to Savana for later questioning. After officials finished with
Marissa, who had stated the planner was Savanas, they started questioning Savana and asked
if she had any recollection of what kids were saying about her. She said she was not involved
with any off the bad behavior and had no idea where the other items had come from. Officials
hadnt asked the concerned students when the pills had been given to them or where Savana
could be hiding them. When officials found nothing in Savanas bag they later asked Savana to
go to the school nurse and strip of all her clothes and have a full body search, underneath her
clothing. There was nothing found, and soon when Savanas mother was notified she was very
upset and felt the school had violated Savanas 4th Amendment rights. After knowing all the
facts and concern, the question the court needs to answer is, did the school official's search of
Savana Reddings person violate her 4th Amendment right?
In the Supreme Court Case of New Jersey vs. T.L.O. the two rules that were found to
determine the reasonableness of the search are one must consider whether the...action was
justified at its inception, and one must determine whether the search as actually conducted
was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference in the first
place (4). Assistant Principal Wilson had little evidence and suspicion based off of rumours in
order to have the search conducted. Although Savana agreed to let WIlson search her
belongings (2) the rumors of concerned students were not enough for the school officials to
search Savanas personal areas. With the narcotics present but not in Savanas possession,
there was not enough proof that the students could have believed that the illegal items were in
her underwear. For the second rule of the case the search being related was not equivalent.
Written in the 4th Amendment, Savana has the right to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and gives her the right to be protected from unreasonable searches. Even though this

is good for all American citizens, when dealing with an in-school search and seizure, Savanas
right may be different. When in the school environment a rule known as En Loco Parentis
comes to play when the childs parents are away the school officials have full authority over the
students rights and decisions. In a past school-search known as New Jersey vs. T.L.O.
students were caught smoking cigarettes in the bathroom by a teacher, and were also searched
and sued school officials for violating students 4th Amendment rights. After suspicion of
endangerment to the other students in New Jersey, school officials then searched T.L.O.s
belongings and found more items to get her into trouble.
From evidence of both cases the court decides that the Stafford United School District
did not have the right to search Savanas full body without enough evidence, even though
students were concerned, there was not enough evidence to fully believe that there would be
narcotics underneath her underwear and bra.