{"id":5601,"date":"2011-12-21T13:28:41","date_gmt":"2011-05-26T08:01:30","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-05-26T08:01:30","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5601","title":{"rendered":"WA: School resource officer was acting as a school official not an LEO at time of school search"},"content":{"rendered":"

School resource officer from the police department was acting as a school official at the time of the school search, not a law enforcement officer. State v. J.M.<\/a>, 162 Wn. App. 27, 255 P.3d 828 (2011):<\/p>\n

We hold that, like the officers in [People v. Dilworth<\/a>, 169 Ill.2d 195, 661 N.E.2d 310 (1996)], and S.A., Officer Fry was acting as a school official when he searched J.M.’s backpack. He was on duty as an SRO and acting under his authority as an SRO when he personally observed the activity that formed the basis for his search of J.M. Furthermore, though the McKinnon court did not address the issue of who can be considered a school official, its decision did suggest that the difference between a school official and law enforcement is that the latter is chiefly concerned with discovering and preventing crime. Because it is undisputed that Fry’s primary duties as an SRO were to maintain a safe, secure, and orderly learning environment, it is reasonable to infer that his chief duty was not the discovery and prevention of crime. Under these facts, the reasonable grounds standard applies.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Defendant made no proffer to the court that he had standing to contest the search. Even if he had, he\u2019d fail on the merits of staleness. Even though the information went back two years, there was an ongoing drug operation there. United States v. Rodney, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54940 (S.D. N.Y. May 18, 2011).*<\/p>\n

There is no privacy interest in one\u2019s driver\u2019s license records, such that jailers could not run DL records when the defendant was visiting a jail. State v. Hathaway<\/a>, 161 Wn. App. 634, 251 P.3d 253 (2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5601","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5601","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5601"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5601\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5601"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5601"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5601"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}