Teacher arrested for gun in car, valid CCP

Sorry, I didn't clarify Trapp. I also didn't think of this until your post-- It is legal according to federal statutes and for the states that allow such searches. If an individual state has a constitution that doesn't allow it, then I think it would be an unlawful search with the anonymous tip. I don't know Virginia's constituion and I don't remember which state the case the USS Court ruled on occured in, but I will bet that Va allows "anonymous tip" searches !because! of that ruling.
Once again, Sorry :o
 
"In Virginia a permit holder is OK with carrying a loaded handgun on school property if he/she is droping off a student. But, the permit holder must remain in there vehicle, not leave the vehicle and keep the weapon concealed at all times."

Not until July 1, 2005. The change for this just passed teh state legislature and was signed by the governor,. It does not go into affect until July 1, 2005.
The change was in respose to the issue of dropping off or picking up while carrying.
You are in possesin if you are in control of teh vehicle (you do not have to be the owner) and bring teh firearm onto schooll property. Leave a gun in the car and your wife could be arrested, and charged with carrying without a permit.
 
novus, there have been several supreme court decisions dealing with anonymous tips. It depends on whether the informant specifies a particular crime, and whether the prosecution can establish that the informant can know whether that alleged crime is taking place.
 
Does it? What if the sign said "ALL FEMALES SUBJECT TO RAPE"? Does that give anyone carte blanche to attack the nearest female?
Click to expand...
apples-oranges.jpg
 
Spotted owl's analogy correct to a large extent. Just saying it don't make it so. I always chuckle when I see signs that say something like "Not responsible for injury sustained on these premises" or similar. These signs have zero legal effect, or nearly zero, if negligence is otherwise present, because they don't amount to an assumption of the risk - doesn't meet all the elements, particularly if the person didn't in fact actually see the sign. They DO help the owner to some extent, I'm sure, simply by discouraging claims/lawsuits, because the general public *believes* that their claim would be fruitless, if they make a decision before talking to a lawyer. As the man said, if they said "We are not responsible if we murder you while on these premises" has the about the same effect as "your vehicle is subject to search.", in the criminal law realm. Having said that as a general proposition, *IF* it could be shown that you actually saw the sign and read it, then you may have formed a contract - "i'll let you enter if you give permission to search" - which gives rise to the premises owner a right *civilly* to search. BUT you could still refuse the proffered search, and their only remedy would be a claim for money damages for breach of contract - they could not force a search if it would damage your property or be a breach of the peace to do so (i.e. if you're fighting them off physically to prevent the search). If you refused search, then and only then could they demand a 'cease and desist', and give you an opportunity to leave, before they could pass over from the civil realm into the criminal realm, and make a charge for trespassing. Now, *assuming* that a contract was formed, and *assuming* that you assented to the search to meet your contractual duty, then *IF* something illegal was found, then it could be handed over to the police on a criminal referral for prosecution, of course. So now then the question becomes, what if your car is locked, and they damage your property to open it, and find contraband? Could they hand over evidence to the police, for a valid criminal prosecution? Yes, unfortunatly your only remedy would be suing them for damage to your property civilly. If your car is unlocked, and you've *already* assented to a search by virtue of forming a contract by reading the sign and then entering, then sure they've got a right to search it without further permission. BUT, if you didn't actual form a contract; i.e. if your defense is, I never saw the sign, therefore a contract was never formed, and their illegal search results in a criminal prosecution, then you'd have a right to sue them civilly for a tort of invasion of privacy or similar, and your damages would be, in theory, all of the costs of your criminal charge defense, fines/restitution, and compensation for jail time served. But it would not relieve you of your criminal liability (assuming that it is, in fact, against the criminal law to possess a firearm on a school's premises in your state).
 
I would be interested in his signature on a employment contract and the language therein. He may have already signed his 4th amendment rights away as a condition of employment.
 
If he signed away his right against searches vis-a-vis the school, does that allow the school to permit police to search his car? That seems like a stretch to me.
 
If he signed away his right against searches vis-a-vis the school, does that allow the school to permit police to search his car? That seems like a stretch to me.
Click to expand...
Good point Tyme, but (playing devil's advocate) the story didn't mention whether or not the school authority was doing the search with the police present or vice versa (or did it mention it?)
 
Does the Principle apply a pressure splint herself, or call for EMT's/Ambulance do do that? No different for calling in Police for a search. The school can call in and request professional assistance for any situation they face (don't have training/equipment in). (Don't know if the school called the police in for help in the search, but they can, and conversely, the Police can not call the School and say "I want to search Joe's car in your lot just because. Give me the authority under your name......").
 
I don't think that's true. Consider evidence gathering in the absence of a contract. Private citizens can steal anything they want without any justification, and can present it to the police as evidence. It might get excluded depending on the exact circumstances, but if police are called to do the same thing, any evidence is categorically excluded due to lack of PC (in the absence of extenuating circumstances like time sensitivity or likelihood of destruction of the evidence). Why would a contract between private parties change that?

A school needs professional assistance to search a car? Since when? Maybe they need a locksmith, but can any sort of contract give the school the power to break into a car? The school could simply fire the owner if he or she refuses to unlock it.
 
Yea but a public school is not a private citizen. It's a state actor and therefore subject to the strictures of the Fourth Amendment.
 
Private citizens can steal anything they want without any justification, and can present it to the police as evidence.
Click to expand...

Anyone can steal anything they want. That doesn't mean that he won't be arrested himself. Theft is a crime--it doesn't matter who you are stealing from. If you are referring to the fact that stolen evidence can be introduced as long as there was no state action to procure the theft, then you are correct.

I would be interested in his signature on a employment contract and the language therein. He may have already signed his 4th amendment rights away as a condition of employment.
Click to expand...

The field is fairly complex, but generally speaking a state actor cannot condition your employment on your foregoing your constitutional rights. See, e.g., Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70. (Holding that the State of New York cannot condition employment contracts on the contractors' agreeing to waive their Fifth Amendment rights.)
 
Last edited:
A school needs professional assistance to search a car? Since when? Maybe they need a locksmith, but can any sort of contract give the school the power to break into a car?
Click to expand...
Yes, they need professional assistance (same as for a locker search). The school does not have personal trained to safely search (aware of knives/needles/loaded firearms). The incident that lead to this (court) was when a school official acted on a tip of a gun in a locker. He did not call the Police (to avoid the legal issue) and searched the locker himself. The pistol was found, and went off, striking someone standing nearby watching the search.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top