Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Terry vs. Ohio

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , Ohio, USA
    Posts
    291

    Post imported post

    Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and searches him without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.

    Does OC constitute, or give LEO the resonable suspicion that a crime is about to be commited? Can they use it as a loophole?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508

    Post imported post

    In Florida v. J.L., SCOTUS held that a stop and search is not justified unless the police witness unlawful behavior. When having a gun is not generally unlawful, it cannot give rise to a reasonable belief that crime is afoot.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    In Florida v. J.L., SCOTUS held that a stop and search is not justified unless the police witness unlawful behavior. When having a gun is not generally unlawful, it cannot give rise to a reasonable belief that crime is afoot.
    I know JSlack isn't from Minnesota, but in Minnesota, we can't depend on Florida v. J.L. The Minnesota Supreme Court found that possession of a gun in public is generally unlawful and that the permit to carry a pistol is an exception to the statute. Therefore, police in Minnesota are free to stop anyone carrying a firearm to determine if they have a permit.

    State v. Timberlake, 744 N.W.2d 390, 394 (Mn. 2008) at
    http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/ar...60072-0116.htm

    DJ

    Edited to add the citation for the Minnesota case.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    SNIP In Florida v. J.L., SCOTUS held that a stop and search is not justified unless the police witness unlawful behavior.
    Huh? That's not the Florida vs JL that I read.

    Here is the relevant part of that case with regard to this thread:

    ...A second major argument advanced by[the government]is, in essence, that the standard Terry analysis should be modified to license a "firearm exception." Under such an exception, a tip alleging an illegal gun would justify a stop and frisk even if the accusation would fail standard pre-search reliability testing. We decline to adopt this position...

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0529_0266_ZO.html

    Thus the court expressly declined to adopt a "firearm exception" to the standard Terry analysis. Since the standard Terry analysis allows a police officer to search for and seize guns under certain circumstances, the position refused must be referring to another aspect of the Terry analysis--the part about detaining people only if the officer has reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime..


    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •