T.S. v. State
100 So. 3d 1289
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- T.S. was charged with possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia after school officials searched her bookbag.
- T.S. moved to suppress the search, arguing lack of reasonable suspicion to justify the intrusion.
- Meshna, the guidance counselor, left the bookbag with T.S. and later suspected something was wrong due to repeated requests to retrieve it.
- Meshna initiated a search without consent or information, yielding marijuana and paraphernalia.
- The trial court rejected the suppression claim, found T.S. guilty, and sentenced accordingly.
- The appellate court reversed, holding the search unconstitutional and remanding for discharge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there reasonable suspicion to search the bookbag? | T.S. argued Meshna had no articulable grounds. | Meshna relied on a hunch based on requests to access the bag. | No reasonable suspicion; suppression required. |
| May prior disciplinary history be used to justify the search? | State could consider history if present. | No such evidence was presented; cannot rely on unproven history. | Cannot rely on absent disciplinary history; invalidates the search. |
Key Cases Cited
- New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (U.S. 1985) (establishes school-search reasonable-suspicion standard)
- Safford Unified School District No. 1 v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364 (U.S. 2009) (totality of knowledge supports reasonable suspicion for a backpack search)
- A.S. v. State, 693 So.2d 1095 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (mere money or fidgeting not enough for suspicion)
- A.N.H. v. State, 832 So.2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (bloodshot eyes/behavior alone not enough for search)
- S.V.J. v. State, 891 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (gut feeling not reasonable suspicion)