Opinion ID: 1620610
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Iowa Constitution Article I, Section 8 (Personal Security).[13]

Text: Iowa law is unclear regarding whether article I, section 8 applies in a civil context, such as commitment proceedings under chapter 229A. The Iowa Supreme Court generally interprets article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution to track federal interpretations of the Fourth Amendment. See State v. Jones, 666 N.W.2d 142, 144 (Iowa 2003). The United States Supreme Court has applied the Fourth Amendment in both civil and criminal contexts. See United States v. James Daniel Good Real Prop., 510 U.S. 43, 49, 114 S.Ct. 492, 499, 126 L.Ed.2d 490, 500 (1993) (noting that the Fourth Amendment place[s] restrictions on seizures conducted for purposes of civil forfeiture); United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 264, 110 S.Ct. 1056, 1060, 108 L.Ed.2d 222, 232 (1990) (observing that the Fourth Amendment . . . prohibits `unreasonable searches and seizures' whether or not the evidence is sought to be used in a criminal trial). We recognize that we may interpret the Iowa Constitution differently, but the parties suggest no reason for us to do so. We accordingly hold that article I, section 8 applies in a civil context. Petitioners thus fall within the ambit of protection afforded by the personal security guarantee of article I, section 8. We now turn to whether the seizure [14] of petitioners was reasonable under article I, section 8. To determine whether governmental action is reasonable under this constitutional provision, the Iowa Supreme Court balances an individual's interests with the State's interests. State v. Naujoks, 637 N.W.2d 101, 107 (Iowa 2001). We find that the State's pre-trial seizure of petitioners is reasonable because the State's weighty interest in protecting the public from an extremely dangerous class of people outweighs an individual's interest in being free on bail for ninety days between a probable cause hearing and trial. See Iowa Code § 229A.1.