Logourl black
From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington

United States Supreme Court
132 S. Ct. 1510 (2012)

Facts

In 2003, a bench warrant was issued for the arrest of Albert Florence (plaintiff), based on his failure to pay a fine imposed after a prior conviction for a minor offense. Florence paid the fine but the warrant was not removed from the statewide database. Consequently, Florence was arrested two years later and taken to the Burlington County Detention Center (Burlington County). After six days, Florence was transferred to Essex County Correctional Facility. At Burlington County, every arrestee was required to shower with a delousing agent. Correctional officers then examined the arrestees for identifying marks and contraband. Florence claims that he was required to open his mouth, lift his tongue, raise his arms, turn around, and lift his genitals. At Essex County Correctional Facility (Essex County), the largest county jail in New Jersey, the detainees were required to walk through a metal detector. Every inmate was then required to remove their clothing while a correctional officer examined their bodies for identifying marks and contraband. Florence claims that he was required to lift his genitals, turn around, and cough while squatting. Florence was then required to shower while officers inspected his clothing. Florence was released the day after arriving at Essex County. He brought suit against the governmental entities operating the jails, among other defendants, arguing that correctional officers should only be able to conduct strip searches in jail upon reasonable suspicion that the inmate carries contraband.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

Concurrence (Roberts, C.J.)

Concurrence (Alito, J.)

Dissent (Breyer, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 251,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Here's why 251,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students.
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet.
  • 14,200 briefs - keyed to 189 casebooks.
  • Uniform format for every case brief.
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language.
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions.
  • Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
  • Top-notch customer support.