Publication Date
1969
Abstract
Elimination of inequities in college search and seizure procedures can assure the student of his fourth amendment rights. To do so, however, will impose concomitant responsibilities which he must be prepared to accept. For example, in criminal proceedings most college students will be categorized as adults. If college administrators must limit their own duties and defer to other governmental agencies for investigation of criminal matters, suspension or expulsion may have less appeal as appropriate punishment for state authorities in possession of criminal evidence. Police officials may be expected to seek more confining penalties. Moreover, the legitimacy of evidence obtained in warranted searches might increase in frequency criminal convictions of college students. Nevertheless, inauguration of procedural formalities in regard to searches and seizures should ultimately benefit all students. Clearly the demise of in loco parentis and parens patriae has engendered new respect for students' procedural rights: no longer does the condition of being a student justify a kangaroo court. In considering students' fourth amendment rights, federal and state tribunals must ensure that they do more than legitimatize wrongful actions. They must begin to apply the exclusionary rule and direct that it be applicable in disciplinary proceedings. The fruit of the poisonous tree cannot remain on college campuses.
Recommended Citation
A., T. J.
(1969)
"College Searches and Seizures: Privacy and Due Process Problems on Campus,"
Georgia Law Review: Vol. 3:
No.
2, Article 12.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol3/iss2/12