Alex+Wheeler+4B


 * New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)**

T.L.O attended Piscataway High School in Middlesex County, New Jersey in 1980. She was found smoking in the women's bathroom along with a friend. The bathroom was a nonsmoking area. A teacher caught them and brought them into the principals office. In the principal's office, T.L.O's friend admitted to smoking in the bathroom, but T.L.O did not. An assistant principal demanded to see her purse, but T.L.O refused to give it to her. The assistant principal then took her purse forcefully and searched the contents of her handbag. Inside it he found a pack of cigarettes. He also found rolling papers, a pipe, marijuana, a large wad of dollar bills, and two letters that indicated that T.L.O. was involved in marijuana dealing at the high school. She was taken to a police station, and she later confessed about smoking in the bathroom and dealing with marijunia. A juvenile court then sentenced her to a year of probation. Later, the New Jersey Supreme Court overturned the desicion, saying that her fourth amendment rights were violated, T.L.O was cleared of all charges. T.L.O argued that state employees were not representatives of parents, so they cannot sieze her belongings without consent from the teenager. She thought that her purse was snatched without proper cause and without consent, a violation of her fourth amendment rights. The state of New Jersey argued the point that since teachers and school principles are state employees, they do represent parents, and would therefore have the power to randomly search and sieze a student's personal belongings. This court case relates to our unit of justice because a constitutional right was violated. I thought that the orignial ruling was incorrect, that she was related to illegal activities at school. The eventuall overturn by the New Jersey supreme court was correct. T.L.O herself was effected enough by the constitutional breach that she confessed. But since her rights were violated, the evidence used against her was not valid in court, as it was foricbly taken. The trail would have been different if it was an adult, as the adult would simply claim her rights were violated and the court would probably rule in favor of the defendant. I actually would not have changed any part of this court case except to get T.L.O not to confess, and for her district court not to have convicted her at all.


 * SOURCES**:

(2000). //New jersey v. t.l.o. (1985)//. Retrieved from []

Marco, M. (Artist). (n.d.). //Juvenile delinquent// [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.mitchellmarco.com/drawings2/Juvenile_Delinquent.jpg