Terry Vs. Ohio

A "stop" is a type of seizure with two subtypes: show of force and show of authority. Innocent contacts or police-citizen encounters, such as stopping to ask for directions, do not constitute a stop. The officer must physically lay hands on the individual with the intent of detaining them. Grabbing the shoulder of someone and saying "Dont move, I'd like to ask you a few questions" is a stop by intentional use of force. Another type of stop is the show-of-authority stop which doesn't include touching, but the officer by their look, demeanor, and display of authority persuades the citizen to submit or at least acquiesce to that authority. An example of this would be an officer seeing a person shop lift, gets in the way of the suspect and obstructs thier escape. By the action theyve taken to impede the persons leaving they have forced them to a stop. In determining legality, a stop must meet the "totality of circumstances" test, looking at the whole picture, from the perspective of both the officer and the suspect. Was the officer too intimidating or the suspect too cooperative? Was the suspect from a neighborhood where they feared police brutality? Was the officer badgering the suspect with difficult questions so that only evasive answers could be given? What direct and indirect information did the officer have to produce reasonable suspicion? The length of the stop also must be reasonable. Stops of 20 or 30 minutes have been considered reasonable, but a 90 minute stop might be declared unreasonable by the courts. I don't want to give you the impression there's a time limit on the duration of a stop because all the law says is that it must be temporary and not any longer than necessary under the circumstances. Two actions widely held lawful are asking for a person's identity and "freezing" a situation for further investigation. The duration, location, invasiveness, and freedom to walk away are all factors in the "totality of circumstances" test. A stop is justified in any combination of the following circumstances: · the suspect doesn't seem to "fit" the time or place · the suspect fits a description of a wanted person in a flyer · the suspect is acting strangely, emotional, angry, frightened, or intoxicated · the suspect is loitering, hanging out, or looking out for something · the suspect is running away or engaging in furtive movements · the suspect is present in a crime scene area · the area is a high-crime area (not sufficient by itself or with loitering)

A "frisk" is a type of search that requires a stop. The one and only purpose of a frisk is to dispel suspicions of danger (to the officer and other people in the vicinity. A frisk is a search for concealed weapons, necessarily involving an invasion of privacy. A frisk should not be for anything other than a dangerous weapon or contraband. However, if other evidence, like a suspected drug container, is felt, it can be seized by the officer. According to People v. Rivera (1964), a frisk involves contact or patting of the outer clothing to detect by sense of touch if a concealed weapon is being carried. Police, by their experience, are able to read more into circumstances surrounding complex criminal behavior than the average layman. Police know which crimes and what kinds of criminals usually involve weapons. Crimes of violence almost always allow a frisk. If the officer performing the frisk is wrong, the frisk remains lawful. Officers are also allowed to feel under baggy clothing if they have to. Another test is whether the officer has a reasonable fear for their own safety. A frisk is ALWAYS justified in the following circumstances: · there are concerns of safety for the officer and for others · there is suspicion that the suspect is armed & dangerous · there is suspicion that the suspect is about to commit a crime & a weapon is commonly used A frisk MAY be justified in the following circumstances: · the officer is alone and backup has not yet arrived · the number of suspects and their physical size · the emotions, behavior, and look of the suspects · the suspect gave evasive answers (that didn't dispel fear) during the initial stop · the time of day, and the geographical surroundings (not sufficient by themselves to justify a frisk)