Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

New J New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1985 L.O..

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "New J New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1985 L.O.."— Presentation transcript:

1 New J New Jersey v. T.L.O L.O.

2 Background Information
T.L.O was a high school student. School officials suspected she had cigarettes and searched her purse without authorization. Along with the suspected cigarettes was a small amount of marijuana , and a list of names of people who owed her money. T.L.O was charged with possession of marijuana. The Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County found her guilty and sentenced her to probation for one year. Then, the Superior Court of New Jersey, affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress evidence. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed, holding that the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment applies to searches and seizures conducted by school officials in public schools.

3 What was the Constitutional Issue?
According to what The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled, does the exclusionary rule, in fact, apply to searches conducted by school officials in public schools?

4 President Ronald Reagan
Who was the President of the United States during the New Jersey v. T.L.O court case? President Ronald Reagan

5 What was the Supreme Court Decision?
6–3 DECISION FOR NEW JERSEY  MAJORITY OPINION BY BYRON R. WHITE The search resulting in the discovery of the evidence of marijuana dealing by the student was reasonable Thurgood Marshall- no William J. Brennan, Jr.- no Byron R. White-yes Warren E. Burger-yes Harry A. Blackmun-yes Lewis F. Powell, Jr.- yes William H. Rehnquist- yes John Paul Stevens- no Sandra Day O'Connor- yes No decision. In an anonymous opinion, the Supreme Court restored the case to the calendar for reevaluation. In addition to the previously argued question, the Court requested that the parties brief and argue the additional question of whether the assistant principal violated the Fourth Amendment in opening T.L.O's purse. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a dissent, stressing that New Jersey chose not to include the Fourth Amendment question in their petition. Justice Stevens felt that it is not the role of the Supreme Court to offer guidance on questions the parties did put at issue.

6

7 Work Cited


Download ppt "New J New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1985 L.O.."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google