Who may conduct a border stop and search: customs agents, immigration officers and Border Patrol officers. FBI and local police must be designated by Customs.
8 CFR §287.1(a) says that immigration officers may exercise their authority anywhere within 100 air miles of the border.

Scope of search: persons, papers, animals, luggage, mail and packages, vehicles and boats. Building and lands are also subject to search, but usually require a warrant, except in exigent circumstances.

No helpful U.S. Supreme Court cases until 1973.
Almeida-Sanchez v. U.S. (roving Border Patrol search) U.S. v. 12 200-Ft. Reels of Super 8mm Film (mailed obscenity)

Functional Equivalent of Border Searches.
"Searches permitted at the border without reasonable suspicion and based solely on the fact of a border crossing may be conducted at the functional equivalent of the border when the search cannot be physically conducted at the border." (Almeida-Sanchez) A "reasonable certainty" of a border crossing is required—suspicion is not enough.

Extended Border Searches—require reasonable suspicion. Leading case is Alexander v. U.S., a 1966 Ninth Circuit opinion. There must be a "reasonable certainty" by the officer that the thing searched or its contents recently crossed into the country (don’t have to actually observe a border crossing to have such certainty).

Reasonable suspicion and border searches. Second Circuit gave tips (with citations) in U.S. v. Asbury (1978). These include: excessive nervousness, unusual conduct, an informant’s tip, computerized information showing pertinent criminal propensities, loose-fitting or bulky clothing, an itinerary suggestive of wrongdoing, discovery of incriminating matter during routine searches, lack of employment or a claim of self-employment, needle marks or other indication of drug addiction, information derived from the search or conduct of a traveling companion, inadequate luggage, evasive or contradictory answers.

Exclusionary rule is limited to evidence used in criminal proceedings, does not apply to deportation proceedings. INS v. Lopez-Mendoza (1984)

Fixed checkpoints require neither probable cause nor reasonable suspicion, although searches at these checkpoints require probable cause. U.S. v. Bengivenga (Fifth Circuit, 1988)

In order to stop someone for questioning during a roving patrol, officer must have at least a reasonable suspicion that the person is illegally in the U.S. U.S. v. Cortez (1981)
Race is relevant, but cannot be the sole ground to stop. U.S. v. Brignoni-Ponce (1975)

Dwellings—immigration officers have access to private lands within 25 miles of the border, but can’t enter dwellings without probable cause or exigent circumstances. 8USC§1357(a)(3)

Factory surveys are not considered seizures—officers don’t need search warrants to enter public parts of business premises, but they do to detain people or enter nonpublic areas—an administrative search warrant is enough; probable cause isn’t the key for these, but rather "reasonable legislative or administrative standards for conducting an…inspection are satisfied."

Strip searches—"officer…should have a suspicion of illegal concealment that is based upon something more than the border crossing, and the suspicion should be substantial enough to make the search a reasonable exercise of authority." U.S. v. Asbury

Body cavity searches—require a "clear indication" of smuggling, according to Circuit Courts. The courts have consistently held that a rectal probe, vaginal probe, or administration of an emetic may lawfully be conducted in the border context without first obtaining a search warrant. But use of medical personal in a medical environment is required. Rochin is cited but distinguished—after all, say the courts, the officers here are using methods similar to those that the carrier would use to recover contraband.

Holding someone suspected of alimentary canal smuggling for 27 hours ruled permissible. U.S. v. Montoya de Hernandez (1985) Suspect denied opportunity to call her family or contact a lawyer, eventually passed 89 balloons of cocaine.
In U.S. v. Onumonu (2^nd Circuit, 1992) suspect refused to be x-rayed after arriving from Nigeria—officers allowed to hold for four days until completed passing condoms.

Ships—all vessels found within 3 miles of U.S. shores (territorial waters) are subject to a full search. Rule has been extended to 12 miles ("customs waters") as long as ships are bound for/from U.S.
In international waters, a weakened reasonable suspicion standard is applied—but only for common areas, not personal quarters or personal effects. There are no 4^th Amendment rights for non-resident aliens in international waters. U.S. v. Davis (9^th Circuit, 1990)
Government makes no claim, and feels it doesn’t have to, that searches outside the 12-mile limit are "border searches."

Top of Page     Back to Criminal Evidence and Procedure Home Page