There has been a case in the news recently that led to much discussion about the appropriateness of strip searches at the U.S. border. That case is Loretta Van Beek v. United States. Ms. Van Beek filed in U.S. federal court complaining that she was strip searched and inappropriately fondled after failing to declare that she had raspberries in her vehicle. Ms. Van Beek is a resident of Ontario, and was apparently traveling to her vacation house in the United States at the time of the search. She entered the U.S. at the Ambassador Bridge Detroit-Windsor border. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman explained that strip search are left to ”…the judgment of [the] individual CBP officers to use their discretion as to the extent of examination necessary.” The limit on this power, spokesman explained, was that “…CBP officers are expected to conduct their duties in a professional manner and to treat each traveler with dignity and respect.” However, that is not really a correct statement of U.S. law. To conduct a strip search, a border agent must have some level of individualized suspicion. Strip searches can’t be done as a matter of routine. U.S. courts have explained: ”While anyone at a border can be stopped for questioning and subjected to an inspection of luggage, handbags, pockets, wallets, without any suspicion at all on the part of customs officials, real suspicion is required before a strip search may be conducted.” United States v. Rodriguez, 592 F.2d 553, 556 (9th Cir. 1979). See also, Kirkpatrick v. Los Angeles, 803 F.2d 485, 489 (9th Cir. 1986) (government interest in preventing entry of contraband into country justifies searches at border that would otherwise not be constitutional, but border officials nonetheless must have “real suspicion” that contraband will be discovered before ordering strip search). In Ms Van Beek’s case, it is hard to imagine why the border agents would believe that she had contraband hidden on her body just because she failed to declare that she possessed fruit when she crossed the border. While it may be common for a person to hide such drugs as marijuana or cocaine on the person, the same just isn’t true for fruit. It will be interesting to see how the Van Beek case turns out in court. In my practice as a defense lawyer, I rarely see strip searches at the border in Okanogan County, Ferry County or Stevens County, Washington.
-
ATTORNEY DIRECTORY
The below are attorneys in the United States who represent Canadian citizens facing criminal charges in U.S. courts. The attorneys do free consultations on criminal cases, and are listed by geographical area.
Washington Attorneys
Okanogan County Attorney Representing Clients in Okanogan County, for the Osoyoos / Oroville border crossing, the Nighthawk / Chopaka border crossing.
Ferry County Attorney Representing Clients in Republic, Ferry County, for the Danville / Carson border crossing, the Ferry / Midway border crossing, the Laurier / Christina Lake border crossing.
San Juan County Attorney Representing Clients in Friday Harbor, San Juan County for border issues.
Stevens County Attorney Representing Clients in Colville, Stevens County, for the Boundry / Waneta / Northport border crossing, the Frontier / Paterson border crossing.
Whatcom County Attorney Representing Clients in Bellingham, Whatcom County, for the Peace Arch border crossing, the Blaine / Surrey border crossing, the Lyndon / Aldengrove border crossing, Sumas / Huntingdon border crossing, and the Point Roberts / Boundary Bay border crossing.
-
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
Meta
