In People v. Saunders, 140 Misc 2d 544 (Sup Ct. Bronx Cty. 1988), the Court explained that: A detention facility is recognized as a "unique place fraught with serious security dangers. Smuggling of money, drugs, weapons, and other contraband is all too common an occurrence" (Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 559, [1979]) . . . . The search of persons entering a jail facility is . . . to prevent contraband and other prohibited material from entering. . . . The reasonableness of searches of persons at a correctional institution or a detention facility must turn upon the nature of the search and its level of intrusiveness. This must be balanced against the institution's legitimate need to maintain security and order. . . . In Bell v. Wolfish, (supra), the United States Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of visual body searches of prisoners following contact visits with outsiders. It held that such searches were reasonable and did not violate the Fourth Amendment. . . . The court [is not] unmindful both of the unique problems faced by prison administrators and the unquestionable risks to inmates, employees and the public alike from a breakdown of order in correctional institutions. . . . The notion that a prison setting affords the same guarantee of protection from warrantless police intrusion as the sanctity of the home and/or the privacies of life, on its face, is at odds with both common sense and reality.