Terry v. Ohio

U.S. 1 (1968) Terry V. Ohio Facts: Police Detective Martin McFadden was an off duty police officer dressed in normal street clothes. On the afternoon of October 31, 1963 McFadden was walking around in downtown Cleveland. While he was out and about two men caught his eye. The men Chilton and Terry were standing on a street corner. McFadden was used to noticing strange and suspicious things and the behavior of these men struck him as suspicious. They were pacing up and down the street peering into the same shops window over and over again. A third man briefly conversed with them and then walked away. The behavior observed by McFadden was characteristic of people casing a joint for a stick up. McFadden was very suspicious after observing this behavior and decided it was time to take action. McFadden approached the three men and identified himself as a police officer, and asked for their names. The men mumbled a response and the officer grabbed…

However, Law enforcement officers do not have to have justification to stop someone on a public street to ask questions. Under the Fourth Amendment; individuals are completely entitled to refuse to answer any such questions and go about their business. In some cases, an officer may only search people and places where the officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect criminal activity. (Taylor Law Company, 2016) For example, in the case Terry v. Ohio, John W. Terry (petitioner)…

The contact with Ken is lawful because the cop who went after him could have been passing by and not even acknowledging Ken for any reason. When someone is trying to avoid contact with you it does not take training from the police academy to tell so there is suspicion already then when she gets passed him he runs suspicion is even higher at this time. It is not illegal for someone to run in public but when you are acting suspiciously as Ken was then it does call attention to yourself. Since he…

Ohio. The details of the case follow: in October 1963, a Cleveland detective Martin McFadden was patrolling in plain clothes on a downtown street across from a store. He has been patrolling around the same area for about 30 years. Over the years he has developed a routine habit. In this case McFadden observed two strangers named Chilton and Terry. These two men were taking turns to walk back and forth on the same route. They both would alternately walk and then pause to stare inside the window…

Police should be allowed to stop and frisk subjects who seem suspect. In the case Terry v. Ohio (1968) the Supreme Court’s ruling allowed the procedures of “Stop and Frisk” to be acceptable. For a stop and first to be considered legal, the police officer must have reasonable suspicion that a crime has already occurred or is about to take place. Only then can a police officer start a line of questioning toward the suspect. However, the “frisk” portion of stop and frisk must only be done if the…

If so, he or she may be arrested and searched incident to that arrest."Stop and Frisk." TheFreeDictionary.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Aug. 2016. Investigatory detention became an important law enforcement technique in the 1980s as police sought to curtail the trafficking of illegal drugs. In the United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 109 S. Ct. 1581, 104 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1989), the Supreme Court ruled that the police have the power to detain, question, and investigate suspected drug couriers. The case…

The legal precedent for what is known today as Stop and Frisk is a result of the Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio (1968). In 1963, John W. Terry was arrested in Cleveland, Ohio and charged with possession of a concealed weapon. A police officer, acting on suspicion that Terry was planning to commit a robbery, detained him and patted him down. Terry and his lawyers claimed that his constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure were violated because the police officer did not have…

could be heaven or this could be hell.” The policy of Stop and Frisk arose from the decision of United States Supreme Court in the matter of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). This seminal case gave police the right to stop a person on the street and question them and if they can establish reasonable suspicion that the individual either committed a crime or is about to commit a crime then they can perform a frisk of the individual. Initially this policy gave police a great new tool in the…

fourth amendment, with few exceptions, the individuals have got the right to privacy and freedom. The Supreme Court has allowed the ‘stop and frisk’ in the case of Terry v Ohio, which was in 1960’s and the ruling was passed in 1967. According to the case history, a police official when patrolling has observed three suspects in front of a store and they were suspicious looking at the store and the officer identified that the robbery was about to take place. So he approached them and…

“reasonable suspicion” meaning that based on their training and experience they should be able to determine if a person is involved in criminal activity. Once the person is stopped, the police will conduct several questions to determine his/her identity and their activities also said as their whereabouts. If the police fears for their safety they move on to the next step, to frisk the person for any weapons or other illegal contrabands. The term “reasonable suspicion” and for a police officer to…