Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Jill Tinetti v. Lee Wittke, Sheriff Racine County, Jane Doe, a Racine County Matron Whose Name is Unknown, and County of Racine

620 F.2d 160

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1980-04-24
Topic: general

de- scribing “the visual inspection of the anal and genital areas” as “demeaning, dehumanizing, undigniﬁed, humiliating, ter- rifying, unpleasant, embarrassing, repulsive, signifying deg- radation and submission” | "The searches were conducted despite the absence of probable cause to believe that the detainees were concealing contraband or weapons on their bodies." | de- scribing “the visual inspection of the anal and genital areas” as “demeaning, dehumanizing, undigniﬁed, humiliating, ter- rifying, unpleasant, embarrassing, repulsive, signifying deg- radation and submission” | de- scribing “the visual inspection of the anal and genital areas” as “demeaning, dehumanizing, undigniﬁed, humiliating, ter- rifying, unpleasant, embarrassing, repulsive, signifying deg- radation and submission” | unconstitutional to conduct visual strip searches of people arrested for non-misdemeanor traffic offenses

Citator

Cited by: 38 opinions

TINETTI v. WITTKE,620 F.2d 160(7th Cir. 1980)

JILL TINETTI, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. LEE WITTKE, SHERIFF RACINE COUNTY, JANE

DOE, A RACINE COUNTY MATRON WHOSE NAME IS UNKNOWN, AND COUNTY OF RACINE,

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

No. 79-2442.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Argued April 11, 1980.

Decided April 24, 1980.

Richard H. Kjeldgaard, Racine, Wis., for defendants-appellants.

Terry W. Rose, Kenosha, Wis., Raymond M. Dall'osto, Milwaukee, Wis., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Before CASTLE, Senior Circuit Judge, SWYGERT and SPRECHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

[1] Plaintiff-appellee Jill Tinetti brought this suit challenging the constitutionality of the defendants-appellants' practice of strip-searching persons arrested for non-misdemeanor traffic offenses. The searches were conducted upon all such offenders who were detained overnight in the Racine County jail due to an unwillingness or inability to post bond before their initial appearance in court.¹The searches were conducted despite the absence of any probable cause to believe that the detainees were concealing contraband or weapons on their bodies. The district court ruled that the appellants' practices violated the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and granted Tinetti both declaratory and injunctive relief.Page 161We affirm the judgment of the district court, which is published at479 F. Supp. 486(E.D.Wis. 1979), and adopt the district court's Memorandum and Order as the decision of this court.

[2] Accordingly, the decision of the district court is

[3] AFFIRMED.Page 591

Although the searches were discontinued in response to this lawsuit, the district court ruled that the situation was "capable of repetition yet evading review".479 F. Supp. 486,489(E.D.Wis. 1979). this ruling was not challenged on appeal. ↩