PDA

View Full Version : Expelled for having an unloaded shotgun in vehicle


Alex$
11-20-2009, 3:33 PM
Not sure if this was already discussed, but thought I would post it here for discussion/feedback. I am in no way connected to the student, family or school.

Student expelled for having unloaded shotguns in truck

By RYAN OLSON - Staff Writer
Posted: 11/20/2009 12:09:32 AM PST

WILLOWS -- The Willows Unified School District board of trustees has expelled a 16-year-old for having unloaded shotguns in his pickup parked just off the Willows High School campus.
The board voted 4-0 Thursday to expel junior Gary Tudesko after the weapons were discovered via scent-sniffing dogs on Oct. 26. Board Vice President Alex Parisio abstained from the discussion and vote because he is related to Tudesko's family.

Expulsion hearings are normally held in closed sessions, but affected students and their parents can request a public hearing.

Susan Parisio defended her son during the 105-minute public hearing at Willows Civic Center. She acknowledged that Tudesko was lazy for not storing the shotguns at home after a morning of bird hunting, but she questioned the district's ability to enforce its policies off Willows High School property.

"My son was not even parked on school property," Parisio said.

Willows High Principal Mort Geivett and other district officials did not appear to dispute that the parking space was off school property, but they cited several justifications. One of them was the legal doctrine of in loco parentis where school officials may act in place of a parent for school functions.

Geivett said the school was responsible for students traveling to and from school as well as during lunch. He said he believed that students should not possess weapons within 1,000 feet of campus.

Geivett said he believed off-campus parking

Advertisement

around the school was under the school's jurisdiction, in part because it is primarily used by students.
"I'm erring on the safe side of protecting staff and kids," he said.

The incident began on Oct. 26 when scent-sniffing dogs detected something in a pickup on the street north of the tennis courts on West Willow Street. A Willows police officer did a search of the license plate and traced the pickup to Tudesko.

Tudesko came out to the vehicle and said there were two shotguns and shells in the pickup. He opened his vehicle for a search, which revealed the guns on the rear seat as well as a knife with a 3-inch blade. The police held the weapons and the school suspended Tudesko for five days, which was later extended indefinitely until Thursday's hearing.

Geivett said the Education Code requires the school pursue expulsion, when a student is in possession of a firearm, knife or explosive without written permission from the school. He said he was concerned for the safety of students and staff.

"Gary should've known better than to come to campus with guns in his truck," Geivett said.

In addition to the Education Code, the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995 bars possession of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school, but there are exceptions for private property and for lawful transportation of non-concealable weapons.

Parisio said her son was raised in a family that has always owned guns.

"We have always, always stressed that safety is important," she said.

Parisio revisited the searches that uncovered the guns. She noted the canine search found two additional vehicles that resulted in the discovery of live ammunition.

Parisio compared the ammo to explosives which is also covered by the mandatory expulsion law and asked why there weren't expulsion hearings for those students.

In addition, one of the shotguns in Tudesko's pickup belonged to a friend who rode to school with Tudesko. Parisio asked why the school didn't punish this student as well.

"Selective enforcement in of itself is wrong," Parisio said.

Before the end of the session, Tudesko spoke briefly. He apologized for his actions and said he wanted to be on time for school. Tudesko said he believed it was all right to park on a public street with the unloaded weapons.

After the hearing, several school board members declined to comment on their decision.

Parisio said she will appeal the district's decision to the Glenn County Board of Education. If the decision is upheld and her son is sent to a continuation school, Parisio said she would likely home-school Tudesko.

Shotgun Man
11-20-2009, 3:40 PM
Naturally, the policy is stupid, but why do you have to expel him? Just give him a warning.

Nose Nuggets
11-20-2009, 3:47 PM
he could kill more people in less time with the pickup truck then the shotgun if he was so inclined. We need to stop pandering to peoples illogical and irrational fear of firearms.

bigstick61
11-20-2009, 3:48 PM
Sheer idiocy, but what can you expect from a public school, especially in these days of zero-tolerance (an utterly absurd idea when it comes to most things).

BT JUSTICE
11-20-2009, 4:18 PM
I hope these folks hire an attorney and sue the pants off the school district. Hopefully this is the last time Junior ever submits to a consent search of his vehicle, too. When a drug sniffing dog "hits" on a vehicle, there's probable cause for a search, but when is the scent of guns or gunpowder PC for a crime? Makes me wonder if there's more to the story... Does Willows PD do routine searches of vehicles near schools? I hope not...

ZRX61
11-20-2009, 4:19 PM
Parisio revisited the searches that uncovered the guns. She noted the canine search found two additional vehicles that resulted in the discovery of live ammunition.

Parisio compared the ammo to explosives which is also covered by the mandatory expulsion law and asked why there weren't expulsion hearings for those students.

In addition, one of the shotguns in Tudesko's pickup belonged to a friend who rode to school with Tudesko. Parisio asked why the school didn't punish this student as well.

"Selective enforcement in of itself is wrong," Parisio said.

Strange...

PEBKAC
11-20-2009, 4:25 PM
Okay, that is kind of scary.

Here I was thinking that off of school property, unloaded, and locked in the trunk was sufficient. :eek:

Silly me...

G17GUY
11-20-2009, 4:33 PM
This is something I would like to see the CGF get involved with.

FastFinger
11-20-2009, 4:41 PM
Every time I hear "zero tolerance" relating to government issues I cringe. Zero tolerance is just an excuse to put one's mental reasoning gear box into "park."

Leaders are supposed to have some level of discretion and common sense, although it appears that there also zero tolerance on those two qualities.

joemama
11-20-2009, 4:46 PM
I hope they turn around and sue the school district. If he was lawfully transporting the firearms there should be no issue. The kid was hunting for godsakes, maybe he should have left the guns at home and went and smoked some weed like the other kids before school. :rolleyes:

professorhard
11-20-2009, 4:47 PM
Sounds like they could appeal this and even sue the district since the weapons were not on school property. Also why would there be police dogs randomly sniffing cars which are parked off of school grounds? Doesn't make sense, they had no right to search his vehicle. How would they know the vehicle belonged to a student and not a non-student law abiding citizen storing ammunition and unloaded long arms in the car? This sounds like complete BS.

DVSmith
11-20-2009, 4:51 PM
I wish him luck, but with all the cases of primary grade students getting in trouble for plastic knives in their lunch box, non-medicinal hard candies, fingers used as a gun while playing on the playground, etc. I predict that having an actual gun is likely to be a bit harder get a rational hearing on.

joemama
11-20-2009, 5:00 PM
I wish him luck, but with all the cases of primary grade students getting in trouble for plastic knives in their lunch box, non-medicinal hard candies, fingers used as a gun while playing on the playground, etc. I predict that having an actual gun is likely to be a bit harder get a rational hearing on.

Thats why I really really hope they turn around and sue the crap out of the district. If it happens once then hopefully they will back off on this crap. Enforcing a no weapons policy on school grounds is one thing but this is completely different. This zero tolerance crap has got to go.

Ding126
11-20-2009, 5:13 PM
In addition to the Education Code, the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995 bars possession of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school, but there are exceptions for private property and for lawful transportation of non-concealable weapons

Wouldn't possession be considered " on ones self "..in possession of..to have control of??
From the article..I think this school boy is getting the s*** end of the stick and I think the school board made a gross error in their decision. Its sound like they twisted the law to suit their needs.

nat
11-20-2009, 5:18 PM
So the police are randomly checking vehicles with dogs :confused: If that BS wasn't going on, this never would have happened.

NayaL8R
11-20-2009, 5:54 PM
I think with the recent string of violence related to firearms created this mass fear of firearms which seems "right at the time" but becomes wrong with time. Reminds me of a little town called Salem.

Spyder
11-20-2009, 6:05 PM
Huh. I hadn't heard of this until just now. Willows was my high school rival team.

Matt C
11-20-2009, 6:12 PM
I hate to be one of the people saying "sue sue sue" but he might actually be able to get a court to overturn his expulsion. IMO they made a mistake by putting this in front of the media, they should have retained specialized private counsel and handled it quietly. Instead the mom made the hearing public and defended him herself, with somewhat predictable results.

If he is going to get a better ruling now he needs to do it quietly after the hoopla has died down, if there is CGF involvement it should not be made public.


Also, he should not have waived his rights....

IrishPirate
11-20-2009, 6:13 PM
does this fall under illegal search and seizure? what if the car wasn't a students? they have no right to go sniffing it if they are supposed to be searching the school since it wasn't on school property right? seems like a lawyer is going to get ahold of this and WUSD is going to have to either spend money on a trial, or reinstate the kid with a warning.

RobG
11-20-2009, 6:17 PM
Expulsion isn't warranted. But, he was a dumbazz for bring the guns with him. It can and did bring nothing but problems for him. Good thing he had no birds or we'd be hearing from peta as well:rolleyes:

Matt C
11-20-2009, 6:19 PM
does this fall under illegal search and seizure?

No, since he was obviously in control of the vehicle and opened it for them.

what if the car wasn't a students?

Then a student would not have come out and opened it for them...

they have no right to go sniffing it if they are supposed to be searching the school since it wasn't on school property right?

The police can go around on public property and look at (or sniff with or w/o a police k-9) anything they want.

? seems like a lawyer is going to get ahold of this and WUSD is going to have to either spend money on a trial, or reinstate the kid with a warning.

Hopefully the attorney will be able to convince them that they will lose and make a compromise (maybe home schooling for the rest of the year or something). Unfortunately I doubt the district is too concerned about spending the taxpayer's $$$.

hntnnut
11-20-2009, 7:36 PM
Question, What exactly would give a LEO probable cause to search a vehicle? Say a leo gos down the street with a drug sniffing dog and the dog hits on a car. Does that give the leo probable cause to search the vehicle? Does it give him enough to get a warrent? Now replace the word drug with gun, ammo, gun powder, are the answers still the same?

Richard

Matt C
11-20-2009, 7:49 PM
Question, What exactly would give a LEO probable cause to search a vehicle? Say a leo gos down the street with a drug sniffing dog and the dog hits on a car. Does that give the leo probable cause to search the vehicle? Does it give him enough to get a warrent? Now replace the word drug with gun, ammo, gun powder, are the answers still the same?

Richard

It's going to be up to a judge ultimately, but I would think that for a car on the street they would need more that just a dog alerting in either case. It would seem to be easier to develop PC for drugs than for "explosives", but there are ways to legally possess both.

Certainly a dog alerting is enough for a conversation with the owner or person in control of the vehicle, and if that person consents to a search then the search is legal.

Dangerous
11-20-2009, 7:59 PM
why do people LOOK for trouble. of course youre going to find trouble 100% of the time when you have dogs specially trained for smelling for it.

yellowfin
11-20-2009, 8:20 PM
What to do about this? Sniff out anti gun principals and have them fired ahead of time and vote out all anti gun school board members. It's about time we started having zero tolerance for them for a change.

bigcalidave
11-20-2009, 8:24 PM
What the hell are they doing walking down the street with dogs sniffing for guns!!! Willows is pretty much up here, every car would smell like that.

RomanDad
11-20-2009, 8:29 PM
Why are they running scent dogs on parked cars?

VW*Mike
11-20-2009, 8:38 PM
I would say this would seem an easy case to win legally. With California courts, maybe not so much. Best of luck to this kid. When I was in high school, I used to walk across the street to the housing tract where my uncles house from school with my cousin, pick up the mini 14 and the 10/22, walk back past the school down a dirt road (It was a new housing development and farm land) and go and shoot. This was a whopping 15 years ago in Bakersfield.

ZRX61
11-20-2009, 9:44 PM
I wish him luck, but with all the cases of primary grade students getting in trouble for plastic knives in their lunch box, non-medicinal hard candies, fingers used as a gun while playing on the playground, etc. I predict that having an actual gun is likely to be a bit harder get a rational hearing on.

I was in a bank yesterday when a rather rotund kid of maybe 3 pulled a like green plastic gun from his pocket as he climbed onto a chair. This resulted in an ND that sent the rubber sticker thing about 30ft across the bank & hit one of the workers sat at a desk.
Kid retrieved the projectile & promptly shot himself in the face from a distance of 1/2in.

I told him to lick the sticker thing & take advantage of the large windows..... so he aimed at the glass door & shot the next person who walked in..

It's a wonder I'm not in jail for Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor :)

bigcalidave
11-20-2009, 10:01 PM
Should have told him to keep licking the windows instead. But hey, when that kid brings his plastic gun to school he will probably get expelled too...

And I remember the things I brought to school, and I'm only 30. Ha!

MP301
11-20-2009, 10:54 PM
I would love to see CGF jump on this as well. Parking off campus and doing absolutely nothing illegal should have covered things. Stupid people....

tyrist
11-21-2009, 7:07 AM
Okay, that is kind of scary.

Here I was thinking that off of school property, unloaded, and locked in the trunk was sufficient. :eek:

Silly me...

Legally yes which is why he was punished by the school district instead of the courts.

robairto
11-21-2009, 7:19 AM
I have little sympathy for the kid. He knew the rules and ignorance of the law in his scenario is no excuse. Take them out of the vehicle and put them up.

Swatguy10_15
11-21-2009, 7:33 AM
I have little sympathy for the kid. He knew the rules and ignorance of the law in his scenario is no excuse. Take them out of the vehicle and put them up.

Well that seems to be the side of the obviously anti-gun board. What rules?WHAT LAWS WAS HE IGNORANTOF? DONT bring a gun to campus right? HE didnt bring a gun to CAMPUS he left his vehicle on a PUBLIC roadway OFF school property.. Whats the difference between that section fo public roadway vrs. the public roadway anywhere else in the continental US?
As long as this kinda S*** keeps going on we will continue to plummet. It would seem the board is enforcing alot more OPINION than actual fact. He was bird hunting! WHAT THE? Activities like that should be encouraged! As mentioned above, better bird hunting than rolling up a "doobie" before class..Sitting there lookn like a freakn zombie with his pants hangn to his knees, plugged into an ipod thats so loud you can hear it standing 5 feet away..Yea great,lets discourage positive recreational activities. This was the rule of thumb where I grew up, everyone hunted deer and turkey..The school was fine with people showing up in cammies well aware they were going hunting after class. As long as they kept the weapons locked in the vehicle off the campus property the school didnt care. Not only should they sue the school district but this board should be removed as they obviously have no intent of excersizing fairness or fact checking. Theyre enforcing theyre personal opinions and trying to make an example out of someone whos not the issue. Most would attribute theyre decision to the recent trend in campus gun crimes..Once again hip-pocket reaction. Not to mention that becauser this kid liked to bird hunt he will have to explain his expulsion to any form of employment that requires a background..These people are clueless..Mom will probably do a exponentially better job homeschooling him anyways.

paul0660
11-21-2009, 7:35 AM
Geivett said he believed off-campus parking around the school was under the school's jurisdiction, in part because it is primarily used by students.
"I'm erring on the safe side of protecting staff and kids," he said.

Nice try dimwit. The kid may have violated the Federal School Zone law if the shotguns weren't in a locked case. Assuming the shotguns were owned by parents and loaned to the kids, nothing else wrong happened, except for using dogs to initiate warrantless searches. I guess the Bay Area stretches all the way up to Willows now.

GuyW
11-21-2009, 9:42 AM
Take the kid out of government school...it only is concerned with the daily attendance $ it collects for the kid. Sue it as well, if that's viable.

.

NovaTodd
11-21-2009, 10:49 AM
Well that seems to be the side of the obviously anti-gun board. What rules?WHAT LAWS WAS HE IGNORANTOF? DONT bring a gun to campus right? HE didnt bring a gun to CAMPUS he left his vehicle on a PUBLIC roadway OFF school property.. Whats the difference between that section fo public roadway vrs. the public roadway anywhere else in the continental US?
As long as this kinda S*** keeps going on we will continue to plummet. It would seem the board is enforcing alot more OPINION than actual fact. He was bird hunting! WHAT THE? Activities like that should be encouraged! As mentioned above, better bird hunting than rolling up a "doobie" before class..Sitting there lookn like a freakn zombie with his pants hangn to his knees, plugged into an ipod thats so loud you can hear it standing 5 feet away..Yea great,lets discourage positive recreational activities. This was the rule of thumb where I grew up, everyone hunted deer and turkey..The school was fine with people showing up in cammies well aware they were going hunting after class. As long as they kept the weapons locked in the vehicle off the campus property the school didnt care. Not only should they sue the school district but this board should be removed as they obviously have no intent of excersizing fairness or fact checking. Theyre enforcing theyre personal opinions and trying to make an example out of someone whos not the issue. Most would attribute theyre decision to the recent trend in campus gun crimes..Once again hip-pocket reaction. Not to mention that becauser this kid liked to bird hunt he will have to explain his expulsion to any form of employment that requires a background..These people are clueless..Mom will probably do a exponentially better job homeschooling him anyways.

I've got to agree with this.
When I was growing up, deer season might as well have been a state holiday. Now you can't even get a landowner tag - nevermind the fact that the deer are getting hit everyday on the roadway.
In any event, the kid was off school propery, did not have a HANDGUN, which from what I can tell from the law, applies to the 1000 ft zone (I would of had them in a locked case or better yet taken them home).
The Nazi thinking the schools and administrators seem to have these days needs to be checked and changed. I hope the parents sue the pants off the school, the district, the principal, and all the school board personally. It seems to be the only thing that works anymore. Maybe these same people need to read the constituion again...
Flamesuit on - end rant.

RobG
11-21-2009, 10:53 AM
What the hell are they doing walking down the street with dogs sniffing for guns!!! Willows is pretty much up here, every car would smell like that.

So true. I hunt up that way. During duck season you look out of place not wearing camo.

CSACANNONEER
11-21-2009, 10:59 AM
So, this district seems to think they are resposible for kids while they are off campus. I wonder if this case could be used to sue the *** off the School district involved in the Richmond Rape Case and visa versa?

MP301
11-21-2009, 8:16 PM
Nice try dimwit. The kid may have violated the Federal School Zone law if the shotguns weren't in a locked case. Assuming the shotguns were owned by parents and loaned to the kids, nothing else wrong happened, except for using dogs to initiate warrantless searches. I guess the Bay Area stretches all the way up to Willows now.

IIRC, only concealable guns need locked in a case...but hey, what do I know. Kid did ZERO wrong and the school board should be brought down a few notches in a very public way. One day....maybe

Meplat
11-21-2009, 8:59 PM
Expulsion isn't warranted. But, he was a dumbazz for bring the guns with him. It can and did bring nothing but problems for him. Good thing he had no birds or we'd be hearing from peta as well:rolleyes:

You would not leave birds in the truck all day to spoil. This is a very rural part of the state were traditional values prevail. This school board is going to catch hell for this. As far as being suspended, good riddance of public school. Government schools are the major reason modern Americans are clueless about freedom. Being kicked out is a blessing. Government schools produce compliant slaves. :43:

shmeddie
11-22-2009, 12:31 AM
I've seen a similar article where a teenager had an unloaded .22 lr rifle in his truck during a Friday night h.s. football game. He was hunting rabbits or something before the game and someone saw it in his truck and called the police. He was also expelled because it was a school function.

Sutcliffe
11-22-2009, 12:48 AM
How the school can punish students for things done outside school grounds and the way the courts uphold such abhorrant abuse of power makes me, more than a little, sad.

Larua
11-22-2009, 9:10 AM
Relevant section of the Education Code (I think):

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/EDC/2/d4/27/6/1/s48900

A pupil shall not be suspended from school or recommended for expulsion, unless the superintendent or the principal of the school in which the pupil is enrolled determines that the pupil has committed an act as defined pursuant to any of subdivisions (a) to (r), inclusive:

[...]

(b)Possessed, sold, or otherwise furnished a firearm, knife, explosive, or other dangerous object, unless, in the case of possession of an object of this type, the pupil had obtained written permission to possess the item from a certificated school employee, which is concurred in by the principal or the designee of the principal.

(s)A pupil shall not be suspended or expelled for any of the acts enumerated in this section, unless that act is related to school activity or school attendance occurring within a school under the jurisdiction of the superintendent of the school district or principal or occurring within any other school district. A pupil may be suspended or expelled for acts that are enumerated in this section and related to school activity or attendance that occur at any time, including, but not limited to, any of the following:

(1)While on school grounds.

(2)While going to or coming from school.

(3)During the lunch period whether on or off the campus.

(4)During, or while going to or coming from, a school sponsored activity.



(v)A superintendent of the school district or principal may use his or her discretion to provide alternatives to suspension or expulsion, including, but not limited to, counseling and an anger management program, for a pupil subject to discipline under this section.

EBWhite
11-22-2009, 9:12 AM
pretty sad...but i have 2000 posts now :-)

Liberty1
11-22-2009, 9:25 AM
Parisio said she would likely home-school Tudesko.

The "continuation" schools I'm familiar with are populated by future felons. Home Schooling is a fine option. But he should just go to a community college for a semester, show he can handle college level classes, and then transfer to a 4 year college if that is where he wants to go. 4 years of high school are not necessary to get to the next stage. He'd get a head start on real life and the girls are more mature;).

cdtx2001
11-22-2009, 9:33 AM
What someone believes and what someone can prove are two different ideas!!!

I hope they sue the school district.


"Geivett said the school was responsible for students traveling to and from school as well as during lunch. He said he believed that students should not possess weapons within 1,000 feet of campus.

Geivett said he believed off-campus parking around the school was under the school's jurisdiction, in part because it is primarily used by students.
"I'm erring on the safe side of protecting staff and kids," he said."

Larua
11-22-2009, 10:15 AM
More potentially relevant materials:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/EDC/2/d4/27/6/1/s48915

(c)The principal or superintendent of schools shall immediately suspend, pursuant to Section 48911, and shall recommend expulsion of a pupil that he or she determines has committed any of the following acts at school or at a school activity off school grounds:

(1)Possessing, selling, or otherwise furnishing a firearm. This subdivision does not apply to an act of possessing a firearm if the pupil had obtained prior written permission to possess the firearm from a certificated school employee, which is concurred in by the principal or the designee of the principal. This subdivision applies to an act of possessing a firearm only if the possession is verified by an employee of a school district.

(b)Upon recommendation by the principal, superintendent of schools, or by a hearing officer or administrative panel appointed pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 48918, the governing board may order a pupil expelled upon finding that the pupil committed an act listed in subdivision (a) or in subdivision (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) of Section 48900. A decision to expel shall be based on a finding of one or both of the following:

(1)Other means of correction are not feasible or have repeatedly failed to bring about proper conduct.

(2)Due to the nature of the act, the presence of the pupil causes a continuing danger to the physical safety of the pupil or others.

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/96-906.pdf

1. Under what circumstances may a pupil be expelled from school for "possessing" a firearm?

CONCLUSIONS

1. A pupil may be expelled from school for "possessing" a firearm if the pupil knowingly and voluntarily has direct control over the firearm. The only exceptions are where the pupil has the permission of school officials to possess the firearm or where the possession is brief and solely for the
purpose of disposing of the firearm such as handing it to school officials.


ANALYSIS

"Possession" in this context has been defined by the courts as the immediate control of an
object; the thing possessed must be under the dominion of the possessor. (People v. Bigelow (1951) 104
Cal.App.2d 380, 385.) Possession may be in the hand, clothes, purse, bag, or other container. (People v. Sills
156 Cal.App.2d 618, 622.) Having the object for even a limited time and purpose constitutes possession.
(People v. Neese (1969) 272 Cal.App.3d 235, 245.) However, brief possession solely for the purpose of
disposing of the object is not unlawful, as in the case where a person removes illegal drugs from the pocket
of an unconscious friend and immediately throws them away. (People v. Mijares (1971) 6 Cal.3d 415; see
also People v. Cole (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1439.) We believe that "disposing" of an object in this context
includes transferring it to law enforcement officers or other proper authorities.

Accordingly, if a pupil is handed a firearm by another pupil, brings it to a restroom, and
abandons it, such acts constitute a violation of section 48900 or 48915, unless the sole purpose of the brief
possession is to dispose of the firearm. If a pupil places a firearm in the backpack of another pupil, tells the
other pupil of the firearm's location, and the other pupil returns the firearm an hour later wrapped in a coat,
both pupils have sufficient "possession" to constitute a violation of section 48900 or 48915; no intention to
dispose of the firearm could be asserted based upon such limited facts. It also constitutes a violation of either
statute if the pupil accepts a firearm from another pupil, hides it under his coat for a short time, and then
returns the firearm. As long as the possession is knowing and voluntary and not for the purpose of disposing
of the firearm, e.g., handing the firearm to school officials, the pupil "possesses" the firearm regardless of the
length of time involved.

We conclude in answer to the first question that a pupil may be expelled from school for
"possessing" a firearm if the pupil knowingly and voluntarily has direct control over the firearm. The only
exceptions are where the pupil has the permission of school officials to possess the firearm ( 48900,
48915) or where the possession is brief and solely for the purpose of disposing of the firearm such as handing
it to school officials.

Fremont Union High Sch. Dist. v. Santa Clara County Bd. of Education, 235 Cal.App.3d 1182, 286 Cal.Rptr. 915 (Cal.App. 6 Dist.1991) may also be of interest. Opinion can be found here: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/continue.htm (Click 'searchable opinions' on upper left).

Colt
11-22-2009, 11:59 AM
Can a 16 year old even legally give consent to a vehicle search?

For example, if he were mildly injured and needed suturing, the ER docs couldn't work on him without parental consent, even if he consents. Is this different?

Nodaedul
11-22-2009, 6:54 PM
Bunch of bull! I was expelled from HS as well. It has no effect on your future what so ever thankfully. Got into a great college anyway.

Hoop
11-22-2009, 7:05 PM
I don't see how he had possession or control over it if it was locked in his vehicle off school grounds.

School BOARDS are the real problem here.

paul0660
11-25-2009, 6:43 AM
National spotlight shines on Willows teen expelled after storing shotguns off-campus
By RYAN OLSON - Staff Writer
Posted: 11/25/2009 12:00:00 AM PST


WILLOWS -- Last week's expulsion of a Willows High School junior for storing a pair of unloaded shotguns in his truck off-campus has sparked nationwide interest.
Gary Tudesko and his mother, Susan Parisio, appeared Monday on the Fox News Channel morning show "Fox & Friends." An Enterprise-Record account of Thursday's hearing was ChicoER.com's most-viewed story of the year. Online readers have posted hundreds of comments many in favor of Tudesko, although some have backed the school's actions.

Parisio said there has been an outpouring of support, including from a Southern California law firm that is helping with an appeal. She said Tudesko has been humbled by the response.

"I am amazed and overwhelmed with the support, not only within the community, but apparently all over the nation," Parisio said.

At issue is the Willows Unified School District board's 4-0 decision to expel Tudesko after an Oct. 26 incident where the weapons were discovered via a private company's scent-detection dogs. Tudesko has said he wanted to be on time for class after a morning of bird hunting and he believed it was all right to park on a public street with unloaded weapons.

During the hearing, Willows High Principal Mort Geivett said he was concerned for student and staff safety. He also noted that the state Education Code requires that the district pursue expulsion.

Parisio, who defended her son at the hearing, has questioned the district's ability to enforce school policies beyond its boundaries. Tudesko's truck was parked immediately off-campus north of the tennis courts on West Willow Street.
Geivett and other officials cited several justifications at the hearing, including that the school was responsible for students traveling to and from school.

The state Education Code, specifically section 48900(s), appears to address expelling students for off-campus activities. David Kopperud, an education programs consultant at the state Department of Education, said the code addresses infractions committed by students while traveling to or from school as well as on campus, during lunch or at a school-sponsored activity.

The Education Department Web site has guidelines for when administrators should seek expulsion. For off-campus infractions, it states administrators have some discretion. In those cases, recommendations should be based on the ineffectiveness of other disciplinary methods or if a student poses an ongoing threat to himself or others.

During Thursday's hearing, Geivett read parts of Tudesko's disciplinary record, which included Tudesko disrupting some classes, and using profanity and ethnic slurs. Geivett also read details from Tudesko's academic record, including poor marks from the most recent grading period.

Parisio didn't know why Geivett read Tudesko's disciplinary record, including two suspensions and several detentions. She said reporting recent grades was unfair because it included tests and essays assigned after her son was suspended.

Regarding the law addressing off-campus situations, Parisio said interpretation is up to those reading it.

"I think it was meant to be used in the spirit of common sense," she said.

Enforcing the law has been a key issue among online commenters, where some have alleged authorities have violated Tudesko's constitutional rights.

Willows Police Chief William Spears issued a statement clarifying his department's role in the incident. He noted the canine search was conducted by Interquest Detection Canines. The school later asked Willows officer Tricia Alves to determine the owner of the truck.

When Tudesko was called to the vehicle, he unlocked the vehicle for a search by Interquest personnel. The discovered weapons were turned over to Alves.

Spears said he and Alves later reviewed the incident to determine if criminal charges applied against Tudesko.

"We looked at it very seriously, and we felt it did not elevate itself to the level of criminal behavior because there was no criminal intent," Spears said.

Parisio said she has no issue with the Police Department or Alves. She questioned the district's ability to ask a police officer to run a license plate search. Parisio is also concerned about the legality of Interquest's search.

Parisio has filed the initial paperwork for an appeal to the Glenn County Board of Education. She said she will file appeal documents after her legal counsel has finished, likely next week.


Staff writer Ryan Olson can be reached at 896-7763 or rolson@chicoer.com.

The principal is digging a hole, trying to use the kid's grades and behavior record as justification for the school board's action. A straight A student would have got off?

gun toting monkeyboy
11-25-2009, 9:40 AM
And where exactly do they get the right to reveal a minor's educational and behavioral record to the public? WTF? It sounds like the rent-a-cops did an end run around the law here because they are not actually police officers. I really hope they sue the pants off these idiots, and get the principal fired.

CSACANNONEER
11-25-2009, 9:50 AM
Can a minor legally consent to a search? Does it make a difference if the search was conducted by a private, non-LEA company?

Aptos
11-25-2009, 10:13 AM
That's terrible!

Bruce
11-25-2009, 7:30 PM
Perhaps some of you who live in that area should park on the streets surrounding the school with ammo or other nitrate smelling items on board. When the private dog handlers request to search your vehicle tell them where they can stick it; politely of course.
Or lace the surrounding streets with powdered mustard ala "Cool Hand Luke". :D

ZRX61
11-25-2009, 8:02 PM
"Geivett said the school was responsible for students traveling to and from school
If that is the case then the school is responsible for any traffic accidents involving the students....If the kid runs a red light & mows down a herd of nuns the school is on the hook :)

Mstrty
11-26-2009, 7:21 AM
Let me know if they get a legal fund established for this potential suit! Im holding funds ready to be let loose. The mom for this boy was in the 2nd hour of Tom Gresham's Talk radio show
Here (http://guntalk.libsyn.com/index.php?post_category=podcasts)

DougJ
11-26-2009, 7:40 AM
What the hell is this Country coming to?

:rant:
High School is 25 years behind me, but I and many others used to park in the school lot with shotguns and rifles in the vehicles. Heck I used to have them in my Jeep with no top on the thing! Yes it was a rural area, but come on, what the big difference from then to now? There was much more access to and freedom with guns of all types then compared to now. So why didn't we have school shootings all the time? Why with all these restrictions and fear are there these instances of gun violence that prompt stupid politicians to enact stupid laws that result in stupid officials doing stupid things such as this? This kind of stupid knee jerk activity boggles my mind!

It's not about the kids behavior in this case at all. Sounds like a basically good kid, but he had EVIL GUNS in his vehicle. There are thousands of up and coming dirt bags at our schools in this State that no school official will touch for fear of an ACLU lawsuit or something of that kind. How about we teach our kids right from wrong, personal responsibility, and that there are consequences for unacceptable behavior. How about punish early (and harshly!) those that should be punished? Then we can pull these stupid laws from the books and continue onward as a polite society with a solid foundation in the rule of law...

Mstrty
11-26-2009, 9:01 AM
I'm only 40 and My shop teacher helped me refinish my Granddaddy's Single shot 12ga. Not only guns on campus but in class in my hands during school and no one got killed. Our government is destroying what country we have left. Our kids will have nothing left but a hut and a soup line to stand in.

CDMichel
01-06-2010, 6:27 AM
FYI I just posted an update to the related thread on this that I started.

paul0660
01-12-2010, 12:18 PM
This just made the front page of SF Gate online, in a fabulously inaccurate and truncated version.

MasterYong
01-12-2010, 12:44 PM
They have dogs that can sniff for guns? New to me.

So riddle me this: if my car is parked on a public street and a K9 unit indicates it has guns in it- the cops have the right to harass me about it? Before reading this thread, I'm 99% sure that if a cop told me that his dog had smelled guns in my car parked in a public place and asked what was inside that I would tell him to go get a nice tall glass of STFU. I wouldn't have thought the cops could even legally ask you about it, since it's more likely that the guns in your car are owned legally than illegally...

Meplat
01-12-2010, 2:35 PM
Yes there are dos that will alert on a gun, unless it doesn't smell like a gun.

Cops can ask anything they want. The question is, how to answer.:43:




They have dogs that can sniff for guns? New to me.

So riddle me this: if my car is parked on a public street and a K9 unit indicates it has guns in it- the cops have the right to harass me about it? Before reading this thread, I'm 99% sure that if a cop told me that his dog had smelled guns in my car parked in a public place and asked what was inside that I would tell him to go get a nice tall glass of STFU. I wouldn't have thought the cops could even legally ask you about it, since it's more likely that the guns in your car are owned legally than illegally...

Blood Ocean
01-12-2010, 2:49 PM
Here's the lesson, tell your kids and all their friends never consent to a search from any school administrator. Have them call the legal guardians and let them determine whether or not they want to consent to the search of the child. Too often authorities will bully these kids and the parents need to train them to not comply if they feel threatened. Picture the phone call:

son: "Dad the cops say they want to search my car, it's not on school grounds, what do I do?"
dad: "Tell them to get bent"
son: "They said they'll expel me"
dad: "I'm on my way, keep your mouth shut"

Almost guaranteed that this fictional situation ends better than the article does, if nothing else saving a headache.

too old for this
01-12-2010, 10:43 PM
Zero tolerance is what come from government officials with zero common sense, if not intelligence. What is sad, if not scary, is that narrow-minded people, in this case, have one the most important jobs in our society -- educating our youth, which is our nation's future.

Maestro Pistolero
01-12-2010, 10:46 PM
How is sniffing a gun in a car probable cause or reasonable suspicion of anything, since it is not illegal to have a gun in a car? The dog would have to be able to determine if it was a registered, legal gun, whether it was loaded, etc.

coop44
01-12-2010, 11:11 PM
How is sniffing a gun in a car probable cause or reasonable suspicion of anything, since it is not illegal to have a gun in a car? The dog would have to be able to determine if it was a registered, legal gun, whether it was loaded, etc.

Excellent point, I wonder if they can sniff the serial # out and bark it to the leo

DougJ
01-13-2010, 7:31 AM
Excellent point, I wonder if they can sniff the serial # out and bark it to the leo

Damn Smart Doggie...

CDMichel
01-13-2010, 8:39 AM
Please take note that the expulsion appeal hearing before the Glenn County Board of Education has been postponed from January 15, 2010 to Tuesday January 19, 2010 at 10 a.m.

Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused for those of you who hope to attend, but this change was unavoidable and we will work to the benefit of this situation.

Visit www.calgunlaws.com (http://www.calgunlaws.com) for the latest details on the case. Please visit www.calnra.com (http://www.calnra.com) to send your email in support of Gary Tudesko to the Board of Education.

Thank you all for your efforts on behalf of our client and for your support of this case.

CDMichel
01-13-2010, 9:16 AM
For those of you who hope to attend Gary Tudesko's expulsion hearing on January 19, 2010 at 10:00 a.m., it will be held at the Glenn County Office of Education Building at 311 S. Villa Avenue in Willows.

Bhobbs
01-13-2010, 9:22 AM
One of my younger cousins and a group of his friends was expelled from elementary school because they were playing cops and robbers and used their fingers like pistols. He is now home schooled along with the rest of his siblings and friends involved.