Wrong that's finally made right

Here's one the California Supreme Court got right in December (and frankly I admire the court's willingness to change its mind): In 1994 the State Supreme Court ruled that if a juvenile is searched via a search that would otherwise be illegal, the search would be permissible if, after the search, the police were to discover that the juvenile was on probation.

This made no sense in 1994 and fortunately in 2006, the State Supreme Court decided to do something about its previous erroneous decision. If a search is improper, it is improper. Why should it matter if, after the search is done, the officers happen to learn that the juvenile who was searched was on probation? That doesn't make it right.

Well, the bad decision of 12 years ago is now erased by a 6-to-1 vote, with the State Supreme Court acknowledging being influenced by intervening court rulings and "strong scholarly criticism."

This is the matter of Jaime P., a juvenile, in whose car police officers discovered a loaded handgun. Jaime had been pulled over for a traffic violation. At the time of the search, the officers did not know that Jaime was on probation and that as a term of his probation, he was subject to being searched. Justice Ming Chin, who is not exactly known for her liberal tendencies, indicated that in this case, there was no evidence of criminal activity and the officer did not have probable cause to do a search, nor did he have have a reasonable suspicion to justify a search. The officer did not have knowledge, at of the time of the search, that Jaime was on probation. In fact, Jaime was pulled over for making a turn without using his turn signal.

The decision that was overturned was that of Tyrell J. In that case, the State Supreme Court voted 5 to 2 that if the police found out after a search that the individual was on probation and one of the terms of probation was that he could be searched at anytime, that would then "grandfather in" the search.

In the Tyrell J. case, police frisked a group of high-school students at a football game and found marijuana in possession of one of the students.

The juvenile student was convicted, as the court ruled that a juvenile who is on probation has no reasonable expectation of privacy.

No one seemed to agree with this decision when it was made, other than the Supreme Court Justices who made it.