25. In Samson v. California (2006), the Supreme Court ruled that:
a. a police officer is prohibited from conducting a suspicionless search of a parolee.
b. a police officer is not prohibited from conducting a suspicionless search of a parolee.
c. a police officer can conduct a suspicionless search of a parolee if the parolee is searched in a public place.
d. a police officer must have reasonable suspicion in order to search a parolee.
26. DNA testing of incarcerated felons:
a. has been declared unconstitutional by the courts that have considered it.
b. has been found to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.
c. has been found to be constitutional by the courts of appeal that have considered it.
d. has not yet been addressed in any court opinions.
27. According to the Supreme Court’s decision in New Jersey v. T.L.O., involving the search of a student’s purse,
school officials (at least those officials supervising students junior high age or younger) may search the possessions
of a student under their authority:
a. only with a search warrant.
b. based on probable cause that the student has broken the law or a school regulation.
c. based on reasonable suspicion alone.
d. without a warrant at any time, for any reason, and without individualized suspicion.
28. In regard to school searches, the Supreme Court has declared:
a. school officials may conduct a search of the outer clothing of all persons found on school property.
b. while in school, children have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
c. the legality of the search of a student should depend on the reasonableness, under all circumstances, of the
search.
d. the Fourth Amendment does not protect university students in administrative searches.
Chapter 07: “SPECIAL NEEDS” SEARCHES
“SPECIAL NEEDS” SEARCHES