Terry V. Ohio Case Study

392 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 …show more content…
Probable cause is not necessary to make such a stop. When a police officer believes he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual he can conduct a search for weapons for the safety of himself and others. The purpose of the search is important, in Preston v. United States, 376 U. S. 364, 367 (1964) the reason for the search was for officer safety, making searches for officer safety and the safety of others permissible. The scope of the search must be kept to only looking in places weapons may be kept. The Mapp v. Ohio was a case that was looked at for reference to decide what scope made the search reasonable, however in this case McFadden’s scope of the search was not in question. Since McFadden was frisking Terry due to reasonable suspicion caused by Terry’s actions and was only looking for weapons for his safety and the safety of others the search was