The us supreme court has held that airport searches

This preview shows page 13 - 15 out of 35 pages.

We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Wrightsman's Psychology and the Legal System
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 13 / Exercise 5
Wrightsman's Psychology and the Legal System
Greene/Heilbrun
Expert Verified
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that airport searches are reasonable without warrants or probable cause. B. The searches serve two extremely important special needs: the security and safety of air travelers. C. The special needs clearly outweigh the minimal invasion of privacy, and all invasions apply equally to all passengers who are notified in advance of the searches. IV. Custody Related Searches A. The balance between the special needs to maintain safety, security, and discipline over people locked up in jails and prisons and probationers and parolees outweighs the significantly reduced expectation of privacy that society grants to such people.
We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Wrightsman's Psychology and the Legal System
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 13 / Exercise 5
Wrightsman's Psychology and the Legal System
Greene/Heilbrun
Expert Verified
B. Prisoners 1. The reasonableness of searches of prisoners depends on balancing the need to maintain prison and jail security, safety, and discipline against the invasion of prisoners’ substantially reduced reasonable expectation of privacy. 2. Historically, prisoners had no Fourth Amendment rights; the Constitution stopped at the prison gate. 3. Since Hudson v. Palmer, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that prisoners aren’t beyond the reach of the Constitution and that no “iron curtain” separates free society from prison society; however, “imprisonment carries with it the loss of many significant rights.” 4. Full body, strip, and body cavity searches are Fourth Amendment searches, but they’re reasonable without warrants or probable cause if in the particular situation, the need for security, safety, or discipline outweighs prisoners’ reasonable expectation of privacy in the particular circumstances of the case. 5. According to Padgett v. Donald, it’s reasonable to require incarcerated felons to provide a sample of DNA for analysis and storage in a data bank. C. Probationers and Parolees 1. Probationers and parolees have diminished Fourth Amendment rights, even though they’re not locked up. 2. Some courts see conditional release as a privilege, not a right. Other courts have adopted a balancing approach that protects the interest of society by trying to reduce recidivism while still limiting parolees’ and prisoners’ right against unreasonable searches and seizures: a) Probationers don’t enjoy absolute liberty; instead, they get conditional liberty. b) Probation and law enforcement officers can search probationers’ houses without warrants as long as the searches are backed up by reasonable suspicion. 3. Parolees have fewer expectations of privacy than probationers, because parole is closer to imprisonment than is probation. 4. Law enforcement officers can search parolees’ homes without either warrants or individualized reasonable suspicion.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture