The 'Terry Stop': A Review of the Stop and Frisk Police Procedure

Although most Americans exchanges with a police stop are limited to just traffic violations, there are other opportunities for a Police Officer to question an individual. Some may know that a Police Officer can speak with the average citizen; what many may not realize is how easily they can search a person who is not yet under arrest. This search is what is known as the 'Terry Stop.' The Terry Stop is ground in case law from a case out of Ohio. The following will briefly review that case and cover how the stop is permitted, and what options the Police Officer has available to them once the stop has completed; sometimes a frisk.

The case in question is known as Terry v. Ohio. In this case, the Defendant, John Terry was charged with carrying a conceal weapon. The weapon, a pistol, was discovered during a search of Mr. Terry. Mr. Terry fought the search as unconstitutional. The constitutionality of the search was ultimately determined by the United States Supreme Court in a landmark case which created new limits on an individuals rights to be secure in their person from unreasonable searches.

Mr. Terry was observed, along with two other companions, in front of a store by a police officer. The three took turns walking up to the window and looking in, then walking back to the other two, where they appeared to discuss something. The Police Officer believed the three were planning a robbery of the store and were 'casing' it before the robbery took place. The Officer approached the three and asked for their names. The three were not predominately forthcoming with the Officer. At that point, the Police Officer turned Mr. Terry around and patted down his outer clothing. The Officer felt what he believed to be a revolver. He reached into Mr. Terry's pocket and dropped out the revolver. He searched the other two and discovered an additional revolver.

This case created the 'Stop and Frisk' as it is known. In order to complete a stop and frisk, the Police Officer must only have 'reasonable suspicion' of a crime being committed or about to be committed. Reasonable suspicion is a very low standard to be met, basically the Officer must only have some stated reason to believe the crime is being, or about to be, committed. For comparison reasons, in order to arrest an individual, the Police Officer must have 'Probable Cause,' which is, it is more probable than not that a crime is being, or about to be, committed. Once the Terry Stop has taken place, the Officer can ask the individual questions to try and ascertain whether a crime is being committed.

During the Terry Stop, if the Officer has a reason to believe that the individual is armed, they may pat down the outer clothing of that individual for weapons. During the pat down, if the officer notices any contraband, which can be determined as contraband by feeling it through the clothing, they may now reach into the inner clothing for the potential contraband. Therefore, this pat down will not only result in discovery of weapons, but also anything else which could be illegal AND is obvious that it is contraband by feeling it through the outer clothing. Common examples of these are drugs, like a powdery substance in a baggy or a syringe.

Because of the low 'reasonable suspicion' standard, an Officer needs very little activity on the part of the citizen, to justify stopping them and asking them questions. Once discontinued, the Officer can again conceive a minimum reason to believe that they armed which will permit a pat down of the outer clothing. This pat down was justified on the grounds of ensuring the safety of Police Officers, which is important. However, individual liberties can be at stake if a Stop and Frisk is complete for reasons not grounded in this law.

For advice on how your State handles the administration of this Police technique, it is important to speak with local Criminal Attorney for advice.

Source by Moseley M Matheson