That case doesn't really apply, they were in trouble for smoking and the princeple searched the phone for evidence relating to the said smoking. In the process he found all the pot stuff. There's pretty obvious reasonable cause in that search.


Here it sounds like someone was texting, there phone was taken away, and then some teacher went through it for no appearent reason. Now the extent that a teacher conducted a formal search is a different point, for example if they were to hear people talking in a bathroom then discover smokers, that's not a violation. Were if they were to go through every locker it would be. I don't really see a big 4th addmendent issue here. It's more a matter of if a teacher looking through a confiscated phone is ethical. Personally I would say that its wrong, but that doesn't disquallify its abillity to be used in court. (Unless if it was confiscated to be searched then theres another layer. All it is really is a set of fine lines.)

I think the focus would be better deserved on the hyberbole of the charges.