Terry v. Ohio

Brief summary The petitioner John W. Terry (the "petitioner") was arrested and searched by police officers. The policeman seemed to be surrounding the store for robbery. The authorities asked for an interrogation from the applicant and decided to search him first.

Summary of the rule of law When an official reasonably believes that a person is armed and dangerous, the official can find weapons without a warrant even if there is no cause.

The fact official noticed that the petitioner was talking to another person at the corner of the street while walking on the same street. Men regularly go into the shop window and talk about it. Male also spoke to the third man who eventually followed the street. Officials believe that the complainants "block" the stores that may be robberyed. The official decided to approach the man for interrogation Given the nature of the act, the police officer decided to immediately search for people before asking questions. A sudden looting of the petitioner produced a hidden weapon, and the applicant was accused of having a hidden weapon

It is a question. According to Article 4 of the Amendment to the Constitution ("Constitution"), is it an unreasonable search to find weapons that can not be considered the cause of arrest?

In 1968, Terry vs. Ohio decided to coordinate the deterioration of the fourth revision protection. The Supreme Court stated that when judging that it is dangerous and criminal, the police "protects himself and other people in the area" to find "the discovery of weapons that may be used against officers" I have the right to do it. " This is a stop rule that allows police to constitutionally tolerate suspects and allow suspects to be stopped, asked, and searched when there is "reasonable clarity and doubt" Are known. This decision will change the experiences of American colored people forever. Today, the police do not even have reasons to believe that people are engaged in criminal activities, there is no reason to stop them and search them. By "agree", the police can stop, ask, and search anyone for any reason.

Terry's stop is another name for a stop and frisk; the name is the US Supreme Court Terry v. I come from the case of Ohio. If the police reasonably doubts that someone is armed, conducting criminal acts or conducting criminal acts, the policeman pauses to find the court easily You can bind it. Terry's cancellation is a seizure in the sense of the fourth revision. In traffic congestion setting, it is legal for Terry's survey to be canceled as long as the Terry survey is canceled as long as the police are binding the car and its resident before checking for a vehicle violation. Police do not need to believe that passengers in the vehicle are involved in criminal activity.