When Can the Police Stop and Frisk You?

The 4th Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures performed by the police or other government actors. That said, the police have a legitimate interest in protecting themselves and public safety when investigating crimes. 

These two interests are often at odds and create complicated legal questions. Typically, the police need a warrant or probable cause to conduct a search, but what if they want to investigate a suspicious situation but do not have either? The United States Supreme Court addressed this question in Terry v. Ohio and, in answering it, created a legal lower standard than probable cause that justifies a limited search known as a stop and frisk.

Terry v. Ohio: The Facts

A detective observed two men observing a store window multiple times in downtown Cleveland. He followed the men, who joined up with a third. The detective believed they were "casing" the store, approached them and identified himself as a police officer. At this point, the detective patted down one of the suspects and discovered a pistol. Upon ordering the three men to face the wall, he patted down all three and found a revolver on another suspect.

At trial, the defense attempted to suppress the weapons, but the court denied their request on the grounds that the search was reasonable under the circumstances, and the state Supreme Court agreed.

The Supreme Court’s Holding

On appeal, the United States Supreme Court held that it is constitutionally permissible for a police officer to stop and briefly detain a person if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person may be involved in criminal activity, even if the officer lacks probable cause for an arrest. This type of brief investigative stop is often referred to as a "Terry stop."

The Court also ruled that if, during a Terry stop, the officer has a reasonable belief that the person may be armed and dangerous, the officer can conduct a limited frisk (pat-down) of the person's outer clothing to search for weapons. This is done to ensure the safety of the officer.

The Court held that these "stop and frisk" actions do not necessarily violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures as long as they are based on reasonable suspicion and are limited in scope to what is necessary for officer safety.

Call Us Today to Speak with an Eau Claire Criminal Defense Lawyer

If you are facing criminal charges after the police searched you or seized you or your property, you should speak to an attorney as soon as possible. In some cases, it may be possible to have the evidence against you excluded from court, which can often lead to the charges against you being dropped or an acquittal at trial. At Cohen Law Firm, we are committed to protecting your rights and holding the police accountable when they violate the law. Call us today or contact us online to schedule a consultation with a criminal defense attorney in Eau Claire.