Florence vs board of chosen freeholders of county of burlington et al essay

Aside from the asserted lack of foundation in case law, the Eleventh Circuit further states that the distinction has "no constitutional significance when it comes to detention facility strip searches.

In fact, the warrant related to a fine which Florence had already paid. Burlington County jail procedures required every arrestee to shower with a delousing agent.

As a result, this Court shall examine the cases to determine whether there are new reasons to depart from Davis. See infra Part III.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders (10-945)

The Court held that officers who have probable cause to believe even a minor criminal offense has been committed in their presence may arrest the offender. See Brief for Petitioner at According to Burlington officers, the only distinction between a "strip search" and a "visual observation" is the thoroughness of the search.

The identi-fication and isolation of gang members before they are admitted protects everyone in the facility. In many jails officials seek to improve security by requiring some kind of strip search of everyone who is to be detained.

To him, a strip search is more thorough because of its attendant anal cavity inspection. Defendants disagree and contend that "[t]he weight of current authority nationwide as to the legality of blanket strip searches in prisons has turned overwhelmingly in favor of upholding such searches.

Background[ edit ] Albert W. While the purpose of the search was similar to the instant case, the means to serve that purpose were decidedly less intrusive. The use of drugs can embolden inmates in aggression toward officers or each other; and, even apart from their use, the trade in these substances can lead to violent confrontations.

Borough of Woodbury Heights, F. The Court further held that the correctional facility could conduct such searches on less than probable cause. Correctional officers have had to confront arrestees concealing knives, scissors, razor blades, glass shards, and other prohibited items on their person, including in their body cavities.

Officer Monroig candidly explained that processing officers are not even trained as to which charges are indictable and which are not indictable. According to that survey, just nine out of twenty-five townships and boroughs in Burlington County reported zero gang presence.

Hours after the Oklahoma City bombing, Timothy McVeigh was stopped by a state trooper who noticed he was driving without a license plate. There were "many justifications" for imposing a general ban rather than trying to carve out exceptions for certain detainees.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

The case turns in part on the extent to which this Court has sufficient expertise and information in the record to mandate, under the Constitution, the specific restrictions and limitations sought by those who challenge the visual search procedures at issue.

In the dissent, they argued that empirical evidence on strip-searches suggests there is no convincing reason that, in the absence of reasonable suspicioninvoluntary strip-searches of those arrested for minor offenses are necessary.

The specific measures being challenged will be described in more detail; but, in broad terms, the controversy concerns whether every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons recommends that staff screen new detainees for these conditions. This puts the entire facility, including detainees being held for a brief term for a minor offense, at risk.

See Prison and Jail Administration: Pointedly, this Court fails to see how a private screening with a licensed medical professional cannot sufficiently alleviate Burlington's concerns with respect to the spread of M.

FLORENCE v. BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF

Plaintiffs specifically allege that the undisputed facts establish that Defendants' policy of strip-searching all arrestees without individualized suspicion is a violation of clearly established constitutional law.

However, he acknowledged that he has found genital piercings and tattoos during visual observations, id.

Florence V. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, Et Al., 566 U.S. ____ (2012).

When petitioner was transferred there, all arriving detainees passed through a metal detector and waited in a group holding cell for a more thorough search.

These considerations provide a reasonable basis to justify a visual inspection for certain tattoos and other signs of gang affiliation as part of the intake process. Officers would check arrestees for scars, marks, gang tattoos, and contraband as they disrobed.

David McKay Company, Inc. The only difference between the two counties' procedures was the extent of the search. When they left the holding cell, they were instructed to remove their clothing while an officer looked for body markings, wounds, and contraband. There are many other kinds of contraband.

Jails and prisons also face grave threats posed by the increasing number of gang members who go through the intake process.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington

Arguments extolling the virtue of administrative efficiency in a jail setting cannot overcome this unreasonable result. Jails are often crowded, unsanitary, and dangerous places. Supreme Court of the United States ———— A.

LBERT. W. F. LORENCE, Petitioner, v. B. OARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OF BURLINGTON, et al., Respondents. ———— On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ———— BRIEF FOR RESPONDENTS BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OF.

Board of Chosen Freeholder of County of Burlington, Defendant / Appellee Facts: The appellant, Albert Florence, had been arrested on an outstanding warrant for a simple traffic violation, in which, it’d been determined and shown that the fine’d already been paid later-on/5(1). Search and browse our historical collection to find news, notices of births, marriages and deaths, sports, comics, and much more.

Defendants Board of Chosen Freeholders of Burlington County, Warden Cole in his official capacity, and Burlington Jail contend they are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Def. Br. at ) Defendants rely on New Jersey case law that purports to recognize counties as.

in favor of the Board of Freeholders. Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV. Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV. Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Alito joined the opinion in full, while Justice Thomas joined as to all but Part IV.

is and in to a was not you i of it the be he his but for are this that by on at they with which she or from had we will have an what been one if would who has her.

Florence vs board of chosen freeholders of county of burlington et al essay
Rated 0/5 based on 70 review
Florence Samples of Essay, Topics & Paper Examples on StudentShare | Page 2