NCJ Number
100909
Journal
Search and Seizure Law Report Volume: 12 Issue: 11 Dated: (December 1985) Pages: 173-180
Date Published
1985
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This article examines Federal judicial decisions regarding nonborder and border airport stops to determine when such stops invoke fourth amendment safeguards and to ascertain the level of justification required to validate the stops and subsequent searches.
Abstract
Terry v. Ohio (1968) permits the brief detention of airline passengers and their luggage based on reasonable suspicion the traveler is carrying narcotics. Reid v. Georgia (1980) held that the totality of the circumstances must be considered in determining whether reasonable suspicion existed in a particular stop. Royer v. Florida ruled that seizures and arrests occur when the handling of the passenger is overly intrusive in duration or scope, and such handling requires probable cause that a crime has been committed. Luggage seizures are permitted for extended periods based on reasonable suspicion only when the passenger is not detained and is fully informed about the return of the luggage. Exposure of luggage to a dog sniff is not a search (U.S. v. Place). The U.S. Supreme Court has held that border searches do not violate the fourth amendment, given the national self-protection involved in inspecting persons entering the country. As the degree of intrusiveness increases beyond routine searches, however, the level of justification must increase (Montoya de Hernandez).