Suspicionless customs search constitutional: federal appeals court
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that an April 2008 search of the cabin of a crew member of a cargo ship docked in Miami was constitutional; the search of the ship was looking for prohibited agricultural materials, but the searchers found child pornography in the cabin; the court found that the ship was docked at the equivalent of a border, making the act a border search; the court ruled that an individual has a lesser expectation of privacy at a border and the government has a greater interest in searching thus the balance tips more favorably to the government
A federal appeals court has ruled (.pdf) that the suspicionless search of a crewmember’s cabin aboard a ship did not violate the crewmember’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. In the case, a search of the ship by customs officials uncovered child pornography in the crewmember’s room.
Teresa Anderson writes that in April 2008, a cargo ship was docked in waters off Miami, Florida, after sailing from the Dominican Republic. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials with the Agricultural Enforcement Team searched the ship looking for prohibited agricultural materials.
When the officials searched the room of Hilario Alfaro-Mondaca, the ship’s cook, they found several DVDs containing child pornography. Alfaro-Mondaca was taken into custody. He was later convicted and sentenced to more than seven years in prison for possession of the images.
Alfaro-Mondaca filed suit against the U.S. government claiming that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the customs officials searched his room without provocation.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled against Alfaro-Mondaca, finding that the ship was docked at the equivalent of a border, making the act a border search. The court ruled that, according to case law, an individual has a lesser expectation of privacy at a border and the government has a greater interest in searching thus the balance tips more favorably to the government. The court also noted that the U.S. government has valid concerns that maritime transportation could be used by terrorist to smuggle personnel, weapons, or dangerous materials in the United States.
Anderson notes that in the written opinion of the case, the court said that customs personnel are charged with uncovering any type of contraband and the fact that the team did not uncover what it set out to find is irrelevant. “The Agricultural Enforcement Team that searched Alfaro-Mondaca’s cabin was looking for agricultural contraband and found child pornography. Even limiting our analysis to the search for agricultural contraband, however, important national interests are still involved,” the opinion concluded.
