Chapter Five – Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention Rolando V. del Carmen
Mar 16, 2016
Chapter Five – Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Rolando V. del Carmen
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
The Leading Case in Stop and Frisk Terry v. Ohio (1968)– The Guidelines
• Stop• Frisk
– The need for Reasonable Suspicion
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Stop and Frisk: Two Separate Acts– The Stop – Brown v. Texas (1979)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
When is a Stop a Seizure Under the Fourth Amendment? – United States v. Mendenhall (1980)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Does Unprovoked Flight upon Seeing the Police Constitute Reasonable Suspicion?– Illinois v. Wardlaw (2000)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are Stops based on Hearsay Information Valid?– Adams v. Williams (1972)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Is Information Based on a Flyer from Another Jurisdiction Sufficient for a Stop?– United States v. Hensley (1985)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are Stops Based on a Drug Courier Profile Alone Valid?– United States v. Sokolow (1989)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are Stops Based on a Racial Profile Alone Valid?– DWB– DWH
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are Stops Based on Race Alone Valid?– Brown v. Oneonta (2nd Circuit 1999)– United States v. Travis (6th Circuit 1995)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Can Suspects Who are Stopped be Forced to Answer Questions?– Florida v. Royer (1983)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Can a Person who is Stopped Be Forced to Identify Oneself?– Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of
Nevada (2004)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
What Are the Reasonable Scope and Duration of a Stop?– United States v. Place (1983)– United States v. Luckett (1973)– United States v. Sharpe (1985)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are Airport Stops and Searches Valid?– Torbet v. United Airlines, Inc. (2002)– United States v. Pulido-Baquerizo (9th Cir.
1986)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
What Degree of Intrusiveness is Permissible?
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Stop and Frisk: Two Separate Acts– The Frisk
• A frisk has only one purpose: the protection of the officer or of others
– United States v. Cortez (1981)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
What is the Extent of the Frisk? – United States v. Robinson (1973)
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
What Can an Office Do and Not Do During a Frisk? – Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993)
• “Plain Feel”• Immediately Apparent
– What Constitutes Plain Touch?
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Are “Fishing Expeditions” for Evidence Allowed? – A frisk for any other reason than the protection
of the officer or others is illegal
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Is Consent to Frisk Based on Submission to Police Authority Valid? – A frisk based on submission to police authority
is not voluntary and intelligent
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Can an Officer Frisk After a Stop Without asking Questions? – Reasonable Inquiries
Does a Frisk Include Things Carried by the Suspect?
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Table 5.1 The Distinctions Between Stop and Frisk and Arrest
Stop and Frisk ArrestDegree of Certainty Needed
Reasonable Suspicion Probable Cause
Extent of Intrusion Pat-Down for Weapons Full body search
Purpose Stop: to prevent criminal activityFrisk: to ensure the safety of officers and others
To take the person into custody or to determine if a crime has taken place
Warrant Not Needed In custody until legally released
Force allowed Stop: NoneFrisk: Pat-down
Reasonable
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Other Applications of Stop and Frisk– Application to Motor Vehicles – Pennsylvania v.
Mimms (1977)– Application to Weapons in a Car– Application to Residences
Stop and Frisk and Stationhouse Detention
Stationhouse Detention– For Fingerprinting
• Davis v. Mississippi (1969)• Hayes v. Florida (1985)
– For Interrogation• Dunaway v. New York (1979)