Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Minnesota V. Dickerson
1
Reason
The Issue
- The Terry search is strictly limited searching for what is necessary for the discovery of weapons which may be used to harm an officer or others.
Was the seizure of Dickerson's Cocaine valid under the stop and frisk rule as stated in Terry V. Ohio?
The Supreme Court ruled that any frisk that goes beyond what was stated in
Terry V. Ohio is not allowed. Since the officer squeezed and manipulated the pockets content while assuming it was cocaine before even pulling it out, it can not be used because the officer was only supposed to search for weapons.
Terry V. Ohio
Case Significance
This case simply clarifies what was stated in Terry V. Ohio.
- Only search for weapons
- Not for any contraband
- Must have reasonable suspicion
Works Cited
The Facts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_v._Dickerson
https://www.google.com/search?q=terry+search&rlz=1CADEAC_enUS666&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=657&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAgQ_AUoA2oVChMIyo6RzuWNyQIVyRY-Ch3F5QI5&safe=active&ssui=on#safe=strict&tbm=isch&q=terry+v+ohio&imgrc=wMjz8n70jrvCdM%3A
The fact (Cont.)
- During a patrol, one officer realized that Dickerson was leaving a known "Crack House."
- Dickerson walked towards the police and made eye contact with them.
- He then walked into an alley in the opposite direction.
- Because of his actions,the two officers decided to stop and investigate based off of previous experience.
- The contiued to stop him in the alley, and gave him a pat down search.
- Although there were no weapons on Dickerson, one officer found a lump in his pocket, which he determined it was cocaine wrapped in cellophane.
- They retrieved the bag from his pocket, and he was arrested and charged with posession of a controlled substance.