Running head: Terry v. Ohio‚ 392 U.S. 1 Case Brief of Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 October 4‚ 2014 Facts At approximately 2:30 in the afternoon‚ while patrolling a downtown beat in plain clothes‚ Detective McFadden observed two men (later identified as Terry and Chilton) standing on a street corner. The two men walked back and forth an identical route a total of 24 times‚ pausing to stare inside a store window. After the completion of walking the route‚ the two men would
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Terry v. Ohio
Charles Brandenburg was the Ohio leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Brandenburg held a gathering for the members of the KKK.. Brandenburg also invited the Cincinnati television crew to film his gathering. Although twelve members showed up‚ it did not stop Brandenburg from continuing. During this gathering‚ Brandenburg had said that “if our President‚ our Congress‚ our Supreme Court‚ continues to suppress the white‚ Caucasian race‚ it’s possible that there might have to be some revengance
Premium Ku Klux Klan First Amendment to the United States Constitution Law
and later found guilty. The petitioner claimed that "stop and frisk" constituted an unreasonable search and seizure. In 1968‚ the Supreme Court established the standard for allowing police officers to perform a stop and frisk of a suspect in Terry v. Ohio case. Furthermore‚ a stop and frisk is detaining a person by law enforcement officer for the purpose of an investigation‚ accompanied by
Premium Police Crime Constable
Terry v. Ohio: Martin McFadden was a police officer in Ohio who noticed that two individuals appeared to be acting suspiciously. While watching these people from his police car‚ Officer McFadden noticed that these two men appeared to be planning a criminal attack. The two men were walking back and forth in front of a store while conspiring with each other. When McFadden approached the two men and identified himself as a law enforcement officer‚ he walked them down the street and frisked them for
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Crime
Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968) The case of Terry v. Ohio is considered to be a landmark case because it is “understood to validate the practice of frisking (or patting down) suspects for weapons under diverse circumstances” (www.flexyourrights.org). These circumstances that allow for warrantless searches are applied only if and when an officer feels that peoples lives could be at risk‚ or if there is enough cause to believe that “a crime is in the process of being committed‚ a crime has already
Premium
Case: Brandenburg V. Ohio Year: 1969 Facts: Clarence Brandenburg‚ a leader of an Ohio affiliate of the Ku Klux Klan‚ asked a reported to attend a KKK rally and cover the event. The reporter attended with a camera crew and filmed the rally that took place. Twelve white hooded figures‚ including that of Brandenburg’s‚ were seen with a wooden cross that was burned‚ and Brandenburg the said‚ “We’re not an revengent organization‚ but if our President‚ our Congress‚ and our Supreme Court‚ continues to
Premium United States Ku Klux Klan Southern United States
Policing Criminal Investigation 12S-CRJU-C312-A51 Dennis Thornton 14 January 2012 Abstract This paper will show how current “Stop and Frisk” (Terry Stop‚ SQF) methods exercised presently diverge greatly from the initial precedent allowed in Terry v. Ohio (1968) due to the inability to concretely define reasonable suspicion as well as the broad applications of reasonable suspicion since 1968. The most notable current representation involves The New York Police Department (NYPD) and its policy regarding
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Terry v. Ohio
based upon "reasonable suspicion" that a person may have been engaged in criminal activity‚ whereas an arrest requires "probable cause" that a suspect committed a criminal offense. The name comes from the standards established in a 1968 case‚ Terry v. Ohio‚ 392 U.S.1. The issue in the case was whether police should be able to detain a person and subject him to a limited search for weapons without probable cause for arrest. The court held that police may conduct a limited search of a person for weapons
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Terry v. Ohio
use of race and ethnicity as clues to criminality.” This term is commonly used to refer to police or other law enforcement officials singling out a person or group of people as “potential suspects” because of their race or ethnicity (p.98). Terry v. Ohio On October 31‚ 1963‚ while on a downtown beat which he had patrolled many times over a period of several years‚ Cleveland Police Department detective Martin McFadden spotted two men‚ standing on a street corner at 1276 Euclid Avenue. Detective McFadden
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Crime
http://law.jrank.org/pages/5874/Criminal- Procedure-Automobile-Exception-Warrant- Requirement.html Stuckey‚ G.‚ Roberson‚ C.‚ & Wallace‚ H. (2006). Procedures in the justice system (8th Ed.). Upper Saddle River‚ NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Terry v. Ohio (1968.). Retrieved 06 17 2011 from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi- bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=392&invol=1 Search and Seizure (n.d.). Retrieved 06 17 2011 from http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/criminal_rights/your-rights-search-and-seizure/fourth-
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Terry v. Ohio