Skip to main content

reasonable suspicion standard

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

Issues

Can a prison perform a strip search of each detainee regardless of the reason for the arrest?

 

Petitioner Albert Florence was arrested on an outdated bench warrant for a non-indictable offense and was subjected to “strip searches” in two separate prison facilities. Florence sued both facilities, alleging that their blanket policies of strip searching all detainees, regardless of their offense, violates the Fourth Amendment. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed a District Court opinion, holding that the policies in this case did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Florence argues that the Fourth Amendment protects detainees from suspicionless strip searches when less intrusive alternatives better serve penological interests. The Respondents contend that the prison context diminishes the Fourth Amendment’s privacy expectation, and that the privacy expectation is outweighed by the security interest promoted by blanket strip searches. The decision in this case could affect prison security, the psychological wellbeing of detainees, and the future volume of prison litigation.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a jail to conduct a suspicionless strip search of every individual arrested for any minor offense no matter what the circumstances.

On March 3, 2005, police arrested Petitioner Albert Florence in New Jersey on an Essex County bench warrant while he was a passenger in his sport utility vehicle. See Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders595 F.Supp.2d 492, 496 (D.N.J.

Written by

Edited by

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to reasonable suspicion standard