Court rules warrantless dorm searches allowed

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit gave the final ruling on Zachary Medlock v. the Trustees of Indiana University on Dec. 30, 2013.

The federal courts have allowed warrantless police searches of IU dorm rooms.
Zachary Medlock lived in Willkie Quad his sophomore year in 2011.

One of the conditions for living on campus is that the student allow health and safety inspections of the dorm by “resident leadership specialists,” according to the court documents.

The student must be given at least 24-hour notice of an inspection.

Medlock was given a week’s notice, via email and an intercom announcement within his building, to rid his room of any Residential Programs and Services violations.

The student inspectors found a tube they believed contained marijuana and called the IU Police Department to report the substance.

Inspectors also noticed burned candles, an ashtray with ashes and a rolled-up blanket near the bottom of the door in the bathroom, presumably used to keep smoke from wafting into the shared bathroom space.

The policemen and student inspectors said they believed Medlock used all of these items to smoke marijuana.

After noticing Medlock’s closet door was slightly opened, a student
inspector looked in and found what seemed to be a marijuana plant Medlock had been growing.

Officer Christopher King confirmed the roughly six-foot plant was a marijuana plant.

Further inspection also resulted in more drug paraphernalia and a total of 89 grams of marijuana.

Although Medlock was arrested and charged with a felony, the charges were dropped.
IU Dean of Students Harold “Pete” Goldsmith suspended Medlock for a year with the requirement that Medlock apply and be reaccepted to IU after one year.

After the year was up, Medlock reapplied and was readmitted to the University.

Medlock appealed his case, however, arguing King and the student inspectors violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unwarranted searches and seizures.

He also argued the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment entitled him to a hearing before he was suspended, or a pre-deprivation hearing.

The court ruled Medlock’s due process claim had “no merit” because the “in-your-face” flagrancy of Medlock’s violation pushed the University to take immediate action.

The court also ruled Medlock’s Fourth Amendment argument void because the exclusionary rule — the rule that renders evidence inadmissible if it is unlawfully obtained —  only applies in criminal proceedings.

Medlock’s case involved suspension from a university, which was not part of criminal proceedings.

The findings of the search were admissible for “disciplinary purposes even if obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment,” according to the court document.

Even if Medlock had not explicitly consented and the student inspectors had been public officers, the search would have been lawful because IU’s student housing code is treated the same as a local housing code.

Although Officer King is not a student inspector, the court said his entry and search were “superfluous events.”

The student inspectors had already searched Medlock’s room and found drug paraphernalia, so the “intrusion on Medlock’s privacy” was already complete before
King arrived.

Mark Land, associate vice president of Public Affairs and Government Relations at IU, stands by the court’s ruling.

“We don’t really have much to say other than we are pleased with the judge’s ruling in this case,” Land said in an email. “Judge Posner’s decision pretty much says it all.”

In addition to Indiana, the court’s decision will affect Wisconsin and Illinois because both states are in the seventh circuit.

Going forward, RPS at IU will be able to conduct searches with only 24-hour notice and notify the IU Police Department if illegal contraband is found.

Follow reporter Katherine Starr on Twitter @katestarr7.