Section 4 Searches

• Library: Juvenile Law 2011

The circuit court, of which the juvenile court is a division, has authority under §§ 542.266 et seq., RSMo 2000 and Supp. 2010, to issue search warrants.

Taking scrapings from a juvenile’s fingernails and shoe at a noncritical stage of an investigation did not violate the youth’s right to counsel. State v. Stevens, 467 S.W.2d 10 (Mo. 1971).

In In re J.R.M., 487 S.W.2d 502 (Mo. banc 1972), the Court held that a juvenile had standing to seek to suppress evidence obtained by a search and seizure. In reaching this conclusion, the Court noted that the juvenile had continued access to his father’s car, had the right to drive it to school regularly, and was included in its insurance coverage. The Court also held that the plain view doctrine did not apply and that the rule set out in Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 (1970), did not apply because there were no exigent circumstances to support a search and seizure without a valid search warrant. The concurring opinion reserved the right to consider whether the exclusionary rule of Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), should be applied in Missouri to proceedings within the juvenile court.

Quite frequently, the question arises as to the validity of a search and seizure by school officials without a search warrant. Several areas of distinction exist, and several determinations must be made to provide guidance in this area.

First, counsel must be familiar with the basic law and doctrines of search and seizure. When seeking to exclude evidence from a criminal proceeding as a product of unreasonable search and seizure, counsel must initially determine whether the person making the search did so as a governmental agent or as a private...