Week 5 Notes Frisk - Week 5 Notes: Stop and Frisk Stop and...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Week 5 Notes: Stop and Frisk Stop and Frisk Justice Black concurring stating opinions on Katz and Warden. Justice Harlan concurring stating that the stop and the frisk should be emphasis that they go hand-in hand with each other Justice White concurring stating that people who are stopped are not obligated to answer, unless forcible stop. Justice Douglas dissenting, he does not like the idea of ditching probable cause during this obvious search and seizure of a person. Also he says that the people should amend the constitution if they wish to have it this way. 2 things they looked at in Terry: 1) Was the actions justified a. This is where the “reasonable suspicion” prong came from a.i. Totality of the circumstances a.ii. Needs to be measured in a objective manner 2) Was it reasonable related in scope a. Can only search for weapons a.i. Not a search to preserve evidence Notes on the impact of Terry To invoke Terry, officers only need reasonableness, not probable cause. Also, the book “a return to fourth amendment basics,” it noted that Terry had led in time, to a general diminution of 4 th Amendment protection. Terry was important because it established a lower standard (reasonable suspicion). In Terry stops, no one is suppose to care about evidence, it’s all about safety. Bright Line Rules Under Terry Courts argue to see if ordering the people to step out of their cars during stops is too much liberty taking, safety and risk wise. And figured it’s not. They note that courts ruled before, traffic stops are not less dangerous than other confrontations. The additional intrusion of ordering people out of their cars after they were stopped is too insignificant to be worthy of concern. Marshall dissent saying Terry was a nexus between reason to stop and self-protection. But no nexus between traffic violation and order to get out of the car. Stevens, Brennan, and Marshall dissent saying that ordering suspects out of the car could actually aggravate the officer’s danger. Some human behavior experts would even strongly recommend that police officers “never allow the violator out of the car.” Mimms and Passengers Courts believe the heighten officer danger compared to the heighten person liberty at stake of the passenger (because they did nothing wrong), still allows officers to order passengers out of their car legal during a stop. Stevens, Kennedy, dissenting
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/18/2011 for the course CRIM. PRO 125 taught by Professor Sobel during the Spring '11 term at California Western School of Law.

Page1 / 4

Week 5 Notes Frisk - Week 5 Notes: Stop and Frisk Stop and...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online