Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009)
In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), a police officer spotted Terry and another man walking back and forth in front of a store in a way in which this veteran officer believed to be suspicious. The men met at the corner and conversed after staring in the front of the store window several times. Another man joined them in the corner conversation at one point. Believing that the men were casing the store, the officer approach the men, identified himself, spun Terry around and patted down his outer clothing. Upon feeling what he detected to be a weapon, the officer ushered the three men into the store and patted down their outer clothing again; the officer reached into the outer clothing of two of the men, removing a gun from Terry and another gun from one of the other men.
At trial, Terry’s attorney argued that the police officer did not have probable cause for the search and seizure and therefore had performed a search and seizure that was unreasonable in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The theory of the defense was that at the point when Terry was detained by the officer, the officer seized Terry’s person and the officer should have needed to have probable cause before conducting the search. The court held that although probable cause is necessary to make an arrest, an officer may conduct a quick stop and frisk, or Terry frisk, if reasonable suspicion is present so long as the reasonable suspicion is based on specific and articulable facts.
Similar to Terry v. Ohio, in Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009), the court held that police may stop and detain the occupants of an automobile where the driver has committed a minor traffic offense if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the occupants of the vehicle may be armed and dangerous. In this case officers spotted a car with a suspended registration and upon pulling the car over in an area known to be gang territory, the officers had a reasonable suspicion that the passenger had gang affiliation based on a blue bandana he was sporting and a police scanner present in his pocket.
Because the officers believed that the passenger, Johnson, may be armed and dangerous, they asked him to step out of the vehicle and patted him down, finding a gun on his person. At trial, Johnson argued that his being questioned about matters unrelated to the traffic stop made the stop and unlawful seizure. The United States Supreme Court disagreed and stated that so long as the questioning did not measurable extend the length of the traffic stop, the officers questioning about unrelated matters was not unreasonable. Furthermore, the officers were allowed to take a step to ensure that Johnson was not armed and dangerous in the form of a Terry frisk before letting him leave (See Thompson, 2008).
Works Cited
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009)
Thompson, R. (2008). Arizona v. Johnson: Determining When a Terry Stop Becomes Consensual
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law and Public Policy (Vol. 4::145)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
