Terry V. Ohio No Right Term Paper

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 758 words ( 3 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 2

Page 1 of 3

" (392 U.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 three men would have concluded that they were going to attempt a daylight robbery.

Stuck Writing Your "Terry V. Ohio No Right" Term Paper?

View All Our Example Terry V. Ohio No Right Term Paper

Have A Custom Example Essay Written

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......

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"Terry V Ohio No Right" (2007, July 11) Retrieved May 15, 2024, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/terry-ohio-right-36766

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"Terry V Ohio No Right" 11 July 2007. Web.15 May. 2024. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/terry-ohio-right-36766>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"Terry V Ohio No Right", 11 July 2007, Accessed.15 May. 2024,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/terry-ohio-right-36766
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example