ipl-logo

Terry Vs Ohio Case Study

709 Words3 Pages

Terry v. Ohio (1968) This decision established that police officers may stop and frisk individuals if they have reasonable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity. This decision has been important in shaping police practices and has been used to justify the use of stop-and-frisk tactics in certain situations. Terry v. Ohio (1968) is an important case in the history of criminal law in the United States. The case dealt with the issue of whether police officers can stop and frisk individuals if they have reasonable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity. The decision established the legality of "stop and frisk" as a law enforcement tactic. It is also referred to as a “pat down” search. On October 31, 1963, …show more content…

This meant that officers had to have a reasonable belief that a person had committed a crime before they could take any action. The Terry decision lowered this standard to "reasonable suspicion," which is a lower threshold. The Terry decision has had a profound impact on law enforcement. It has given police officers the ability to stop and frisk individuals based on reasonable suspicion, which has helped to prevent crime and keep communities safe. The decision has also helped to prevent officers from being hindered by overly restrictive standards, allowing them to take action to prevent criminal activity before it occurs. The Court legitimized the stop-and-frisk practice, which had been common among police officers. Now, officers could conduct investigatory searches for weapons based on reasonable suspicion. Law enforcement gained greater authority to detain and search individuals without a warrant. However, this authority was subject to the strict standard of reasonable suspicion. At the same time, the Terry decision has been controversial. Critics argue that the decision has led to racial profiling and has disproportionately affected minority

Show More
Related

The United States V. Place 462 US Case Brief

510 Words | 3 Pages

Significance: The Supreme Court here expresses that governmental conduct like drug dog sniffing that can reveal whether a substance is contraband, yet no other private fact, does not compromise any privacy interest, and therefore is not a search subject to the Fourth Amendment. Terry v. Ohio permits only brief investigative stops and extremely limited searches based on reasonable suspicion including seizures of property independent of the seizure of the

Read More

Supreme Court Case: The Case Of Mapp Vs. Ohio

354 Words | 2 Pages

The case of Mapp vs. Ohio is a case of illegal search and seizure. It went to the Supreme Court in 1961. It is important to today’s society because it might mean the difference between guilty and innocent. I agree with the Supreme Court because it is illegal to access private property without a warrant or consent. The case lasted until June 19, 1961.

Read More

Wendell Clayton Case Study

1593 Words | 7 Pages

v. Clayton, held that the police officers did not infringe Mr. Clayton and Mr. Farmer’s rights under ss. 8 and ss. 9 of the Charter as their unusual behaviour gave the officer reasonable grounds to conduct a pat down search. This case is significant to us for various reasons. First of all this case shows us the circumstances, when a police officer has the right to detain an individual without a search warrant.

Read More

Maryland Vs Pringle Case Study

743 Words | 3 Pages

The majority opinion discussed the Fourth Amendment and explains now it provides the the ability to arrest individuals without a warrant when the officers have probable cause that a suspect has committed a criminal offense. During this traffic stop, the arresting officer determined a crime had occurred. It was up to the court to determine if the officer had probable cause to arrest Pringle. Chief Justice Rehnquist determined that the arresting officers proved a crime occurred and there was probable cause to determine Pringle should be arrested. According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, when three people are in the car where drugs are located and the owner of the drugs is not clear with no one admitting possession, it is reasonable for the officers to believe that either one or all of the occupants of the vehicle committed the offense.

Read More

The Supreme Court Case Of Mapp V. Ohio

251 Words | 2 Pages

Good evening! This is Bryce Seyler with WFREE News reporting live from the United States Supreme Court. Today, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Mapp v. Ohio making it one of the most famous Supreme Court cases to take place in this century. Supreme Court Justices had to decide whether evidence discovered during a search and seizure conducted in violation of the 4th Amendment of the Constitution was admissible in a state court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Dollree Mapp in a 6-3 vote.

Read More

Florida Vs. Jardines Case Study

558 Words | 3 Pages

The case of Florida versus Jardines was heard before the Supreme Court on October 31, 2012 and a decision was made on March 26, 2013. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jardines. This case challenged the fundamental core of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. The ruling of this case has impacted how law officials handle searches and the use of drug dogs. This case also challenged the boundary line of where personal property starts.

Read More

US Supreme Court Case: The Mapp Vs. Ohio Case

955 Words | 4 Pages

Mapp vs. Ohio On June 19, 1961, the Mapp v. Ohio case was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington D.C. The situation addressed in court was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment states that people have the right to be secure in their houses, and it forbids unreasonable searches and seizures.

Read More

Minnesota Vs Dickerson Case Study

1019 Words | 5 Pages

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled to charged Terry because Officer McFadden acted within the scope of the Fourth Amendment based on suspicious behavior giving him probable cause to conduct the search and seizure of the

Read More

Justice Brennan's Case: The Terry Vs. Ohio Case

425 Words | 2 Pages

After reviewing Justice Brennan’s dissenting opinion, I cannot agree with his argument that a conducting a protective sweep surpasses the purpose of the Terry v. Ohio decision. Justice Brennan agreed that a protective sweep was not a full-blown search, but it was much more intrusive than a limited pat down for weapons or the frisk of an automobile (Sifferlen, 1991). Also, Justice Brennan also stated he believed officers’ should possess probable cause to initiate a protective sweep of a home (Sifferlen, 1991). The Terry v. Ohio decision permits law enforcement officers to perform a pat down of the outer clothing, when the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the subject he or she is dealing with, is armed and dangerous (Hall, 2015). The main purpose of Terry v. Ohio decision is to locate weapons that may be used to hurt the

Read More

Terry V. Ohio Tests The Limitations Of The Fourth Amendment

841 Words | 4 Pages

The case of Terry v. Ohio tests the limitations of the fourth amendment. On October 31st, 1963, three men were acting suspicious on the streets of Ohio. A police officer noticed three men walking back and forth and peering into a store as if they were planning to rob it. They continued doing so and ended up meeting with another person. At that point, officer McFadden approached to stop and frisk for any weapons or drugs.

Read More

Riley Vs California Case Study

1299 Words | 6 Pages

Within this court case, it was determined that that searches and seizures require a warrant unless it is to prevent a future crime from happening. The court also referenced Arizona v. Gant, which focused on whether or not officers may search property found on or near the arrestee and also discussed elements of Chimel v. California, which stated that it is reasonable for an officer to search a person and that it is reasonable for an officer to search and seize any evidence from an arrestee if it is to protect it from being destroyed. The Supreme Court also cited United States v. Robinson, which also cited that a search led to

Read More

Evolution Of The Supreme Court Between 1953 And 2003

563 Words | 3 Pages

In this period, the Fourth Amendment was strongly upheld along with the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule is made so that police couldn't use any illegally-obtained evidence to convict a defendant. Chief Justice Earl Warren brought the exclusionary rule from local to state-level in the court case of Mapp v. Ohio. In this case, officers forced their way into a home without a search warrant because they suspected Dollree Mapp of hiding an alleged bomber, where they collected evidence so they could use it against him in court. The exclusionary rule was enforced, making none of the evidence found applicable to be used against Mapp in court.

Read More

Mapp Vs Ohio Case Study

1872 Words | 8 Pages

41. Mapp v. Ohio (1961): The Supreme Court ruling that decided that the fourth amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures must be extended to the states. If there is no probable cause or search warrant issued legally, the evidence found unconstitutionally will be inadmissible in the courtroom and not even considered when pressing charges. The exclusionary rule, in this case, is a right that will restrict the states and not just the federal government, including the states in more of the federal rights as outlined in the Constitution.

Read More

Earl Warren's Supreme Court Cases

1023 Words | 5 Pages

The outcome of this case made sure that every person who was arrested and put under the custody of the police had to read their Miranda rights and therefore made known of their Fifth Amendment rights. This case would change the procedure of every legal arrest from that point on, and ensure that any person under the custody of the police would be fully aware of their

Read More

Persuasive Essay On Stop And Frisk

796 Words | 4 Pages

Talks about is the stop-and-frisk legal in the United States and they have the fourth amendment on this situation. Terry v Ohio case resulted in the stop-and-frisk issue. HISTORY: Stop-and-frisk also known as “stop-and-search, began in the 1950’s. It gave police the legal right to search someone warrantless, if it had something to do with the law.

Read More

More about Terry Vs Ohio Case Study

Open Document