Florence vs board of chosen freeholders of county of burlington et al essay

With respect to the Circuit Courts of Appeal, eight circuits presently agree that reasonable suspicion must be present before a strip search is conducted in this context. Persons just arrested may have wounds or other injuries requiring immediate medical attention.

The American Revolution Bailyn, Bernard. While Judge Ikuta's concurrence provides guidance with respect to the Bell balancing test, it does not change the fact that the Ninth Circuit struck down a strip search procedure, similar to the one here, as unconstitutional.

The current case is set against this precedent and governed by the principles announced in Turner and Bell. Despite Florence's protests about the warrant's validity, he was taken by the State Trooper to the Burlington Jail. It did not reflect his previous arrest for possession of a deadly weapon.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons recommends that staff screen new detainees for these conditions.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington

See Bell, U. Chronologically comprehensive, this source offers short, medium and long entries about all aspects of the city's history. The mere fact that strip searches were conducted after contact visits pursuant to a blanket policy does not, by necessity, eradicate any reasonable suspicion used to justify them.

The arrestee argued the Fourth Amendment prohibited her custodial arrest without a warrant when an offense could not result in jail time and there was no compelling need for immediate detention.

Jails are often crowded, unsanitary, and dangerous places. He was charged with obstruction of justice and use of a deadly weapon.

See New Jersey Wardens Brief 11— Foner, Eric and John A. Summary Judgment Cross-Motions Plaintiffs move for summary judgment, claiming that the procedures described above amount to unconstitutional strip searches even if, in the case of Burlington Jail, the procedures are termed a "visual observation" or if, in the case of the Essex Jail, the written policy now facially complies with New Jersey's strip searching rules.

It is not clear whether this last step was part of the normal practice. Others may make a quick decision to hide unlawful substances to avoid getting in more trouble at the time of their arrest. Although the Supreme Court opined that evidence of a smuggling problem is "of little import" to the analysis, see Bell, U.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders (10-945)

The only difference between the two counties' procedures was the extent of the search. The Supreme Court nevertheless upheld the blanket strip search procedure, and stated that "the lack of evidence was of little import.

The officers who conduct an initial search often do not have access to criminal history records. In addition, Florence claims that, in most cases, an individualized reasonable suspicion to justify a strip search must be found for each detainee.

Gangs do coerce inmates who have access to the outside world, such as people serving their time on the weekends, to sneak things into the jail. Pills and medications enhance suicide risks.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

The Courts of Appeals to address this issue in the last decade, however, have come to the opposite conclusion. These cases establish that correctional officials must be permitted to devise reasonable search policies to detect and deter the possession of contraband in their facilities.

Library of America, The accommodations provided in these situations may diminish the need to conduct some aspects of the searches at issue. The point being that these are not persons one might ordinarily suspect of smuggling contraband. Individual jurisdictions can of course choose "to impose more restrictive safeguards through statutes limiting warrantless arrests for minor offenders.

But even if that policy made no distinction between misdemeanor and felony offenders, the persons strip searched pursuant to the policy were admitted inmates exposed to outside individuals via planned contact visits. The Historical Atlas of the American Revolution.

There is one discrepancy in the record, however. An arrestee may be carrying a false ID or lie about his identity. See Brief for Petitioner at 23— Seeking relief under 42 U. Other possible classifications based on characteristics of individual detainees also might prove to be unworkable or even give rise to charges of discriminatory application.

Visitors can easily conceal guns, knives, drugs, or other contraband in countless ways and pass them to an inmate unnoticed by even the most vigilant observers. Florence then showered, and was directed to open his mouth and lift his genitals. Inmates commit more than 10, assaults on correctional staff every year and many more among themselves.

Even if people arrested for a minor offense do not themselves wish to introduce contraband into a jail, they may be coerced into doing so by others. Brief for Sister Bernie Galvin et al. Brief for Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project, et al.

Merits Briefs for the Respondents. Brief for Essex County; Brief for Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington et al. Amicus Briefs in Support of the Respondents. Brief for the National Sheriffs’ Association. THE COUNTY OF BURLINGTON, et al., Respondents.

———— On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ———— BRIEF FOR RESPONDENTS BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OF BURLINGTON; BURLINGTON COUNTY JAIL; WARDEN JUEL COLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS WARDEN OF BURLINGTON.

in favor of the Board of Freeholders. Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV.

FLORENCE v. BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF

Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV. Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Alito joined the opinion in full, while Justice Thomas joined as to all but Part IV. albert w. florence, petitioner v. BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OF BURLINGTON et al.

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit. Search and browse our historical collection to find news, notices of births, marriages and deaths, sports, comics, and much more.

Florence V. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, Et Al., 566 U.S. ____ (2012).

The Fourth Amendment and New Technologies. See Brief for Electronic Frontier Foundation et al. 16– Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, S. Ct.(

Florence vs board of chosen freeholders of county of burlington et al essay
Rated 4/5 based on 81 review
New-York Historical Society | Research >