he signed the agreement. To combat recidivist probationers and parolees, the Bettendorf Police Department commonly relied on paragraph P of the standard terms of a parole agreement to conduct searches of parolees in the city. Its officers were made aware of the consent-search provision and received training in conducting parolee searches. More specifically, Bettendorf police officers implemented a protocol to check the Traveler Motel in Bettendorf several times each day as part of a routine patrol. The motel was known by the po S.Ct. 2014, 2022, 141 L.Ed.2d 344, 355 (1998); State v. Turner, 297 S.W.3d 155, 166 (Tenn.2009) (adopting Samson “where the parolee has agreed to warrantless searches by law enforcement officers”); State v. Velasquez, 612. P.2d 1254, 1260 & n. 4 (Utah 1983) (<HOLDING>); Pena v. State, 792 P.2d 1352, 1357-58
holding a parole rule equivalent to a statute holding that the state courts decision to uphold the parole boards denial of parole was an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence holding that parole is not a right in pennsylvania holding defendant does not waive fourth amendment protection by signing parole agreement but the search condition does confirm right of parole officer to conduct reasonable searches within scope of parole mission holding that there was no legal right to court review of parole board decision because there is no legal right to release on parole