Both the cases of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. (1968) and State v. Perkins, 358 N.J. Super 151 (2003), dealt with search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The first case involved the constitutionality of ‘stop and frisk’ conducted on the grounds of reasonable suspicion. The second case, on the other hand, dealt with the issue of admissibility of an illegal weapon seized under a domestic violence law in a criminal trial against the defendant. The Terry case illustrated substantive law while the Perkins case demonstrated procedural law.
Substantial law “creates, defines and regulates rights” (Walston-Dunham 2011, p. 101) and the Terry case illustrated this by clarifying the breadth and width of a Fourth Amendment right and the extent to which a police officer can infringe upon it absent a search warrant. Thus, the Court held that a police officer acting under reasonable suspicion can stop a person on the street and frisk him for concealed weapons. Procedural law, on the other hand, is concerned with how substantive rights must be enforced or acted upon in a court of law (Gerdy 2000, p. 1). This was demonstrated in the Perkins case. Here, the Court held that an illegal weapon seized under a domestic violence law cannot be deemed to have been seized under the plain view doctrine. It cannot be used, therefore, in court as evidence against the defendant. The reason, according to the Court, was that its seizure was tolerated under the doctrine of State interest – a civil concept – and its illegal nature was not evident to the officers when they seized it.
The two cases, i.e. Terry and Perkins, demonstrated the distinction between substantive and procedural laws. Terry is an example of substantive law because it dealt with the rights of a person per se – its substance, extent and limitations. On the other hand, Perkins illustrated procedural law because it was concerned with the legal treatment of a contraband that was not recognized as such at the time of its seizure – a seizure that was underpinned by a civil purpose.
References:
Gerdy, K. (2000). “What is the Difference between Substantive and Procedural Law? And how do I Research Procedure?” Perspectives: Teaching Legal and Research and Writing, vol. 9(1).
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. (1968).
Walston-Dunham, B. (2011). Introduction to Law. Clifton Park, NY: Cengage Learning.
