U.S. Supreme Court hears appeal of Burlco man strip-searched twice

October 12, 2011|By Jan Hefler, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
Image 1 of 3
  • Brooks DiDonato, a lawyer who represents Burlington County in the case, says jail security is at stake. (Jan Hefler / Staff)
  • Brooks DiDonato, a lawyer who represents Burlington County in the case, says jail security is at stake. (Jan Hefler / Staff)
  • Carter G. Phillips (left) and Alfred Putnam Jr. defended Burlington County in the case. (Jan Hefler / Staff)
  • Lawyer Susan Chana Lask (left ) stands with Albert Florence and his wife April. (Jan Hefler / Staff)

WASHINGTON - Is it permissible, under the Constitution, to order a man to disrobe and shower in front of corrections officers even though he was arrested for a nonviolent offense?

Would it be acceptable if the officers maintained a distance of at least five feet - or arm's length - while visually inspecting him while he was nude?

Can an inmate be checked for contraband without making him squat, cough, and lift his genitals, as Albert Florence of Burlington County was ordered to do during a second search after he was sent to Essex County?

In a case that originated in a Burlington County traffic stop more than six years ago, justices of the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday revisited an issue the court last dealt with 32 years ago - whether there should be limits to strip searches at jails.

Story continues below.

Florence, 36, said his rights were violated and he felt humiliated when he was strip-searched twice - first in the county jail in Mount Holly after he was arrested during a motor vehicle stop, and then more intrusively in the Essex County jail in Newark.

He had been detained because of an unrelated contempt-of-court warrant for an unpaid fine - which he had satisfied two years before. Florence spent six days in jail before the clerical mistake on the warrant was verified.

During oral arguments, justices peppered the attorney for Burlington and Essex Counties with questions seeking to learn how the counties would balance the need for security against the rights people have against unreasonable searches.

"The balance would tip in the favor of the institution" to ensure the safety of inmates and guards, responded Carter G. Phillips, who represented both counties.

Thomas C. Goldstein, who represented Florence, said county jails "do strip everyone for contraband. . . . Their rule is, they can."

"Ultimately, it's going to be our rule," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy shot back to laughter in the hall.

The justices agreed to hear the case in April after conflicting rulings were issued by federal courts.

The last time the high court took up the subject was in 1979. Then, the justices decided that strip searches are constitutional, but only after an inmate has a visitor, to prevent drugs and weapons from being smuggled into a jail.

1 | 2 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|