Verified Document

Terry V. Ohio No Right Term Paper

S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1968). The Court adopted the notion that Officer McFadden was protecting himself and others and found that there was probable cause to search the suspects. They "concede the officer's right to conduct a search" incident to the arrest and when, in his considered opinion, he was certain that the men were going to commit a crime. Only Justice Douglas dissented, saying that he could not find the search and seizure to be constitutional under Fourth Amendment standards, as there was not probable cause to believe a crime had been committed or was in the process of being committed or was about to be committed. He believed the police were being given powers that infringed upon personal liberties when they could detain and frisk anyone they considered "suspicious." He made the statement that "if they can 'seize' and 'search' him in their discretion, we enter a new regime" (392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1968).

The Court, in looking at this case, focused strongly on the particular facts of this one case, as if it was an exception, noting that the officer had acted on more than a "hunch" and that anyone observing the suspicious actions of these...

The officer also believed that the men were armed, and therefore were a threat to his and the public safety. Upon finding concealed weapons, the officer then arrested the three men. The Court found that the search for the concealed weapons was limited in scope and was designed to protect himself and the public safety (Oyez, 2007).
In an era where the "Warren Court" challenged traditional limitations, this case upheld them because it was such a clear-cut case of intent to commit a crime that prompted the subsequent frisking of the suspects. Their rights were not violated, the Court found, because they had displayed intent and what the officer acted upon was more than a "hunch," leading to what was considered a "reasonable" act on the part of the officer.

References

Terry v. State of Ohio 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1968. Retrieved July 10, 2007 at http://www.soc.umn.edu/~samaha/cases/terry%20v%20ohio.html.

Oyez Project, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). (2007). Retrieved July 10, 2007 at http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_67/.

Sources used in this document:
References

Terry v. State of Ohio 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1968. Retrieved July 10, 2007 at http://www.soc.umn.edu/~samaha/cases/terry%20v%20ohio.html.

Oyez Project, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). (2007). Retrieved July 10, 2007 at http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_67/.
Cite this Document:
Copy Bibliography Citation

Sign Up for Unlimited Study Help

Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.

Get Started Now