What is a Terry Stop?

If you are stopped and searched while you are out walking in Indianapolis or a surrounding area, it is critical to understand your rights under the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure, and US Supreme Court case law has clarified the rights afforded to individuals under the Fourth Amendment over a number of decades. One of those cases, Terry v. Ohio (1968), has become a key yet controversial law in relation to the legality of a practice by police known as a “stop and frisk.” If you have experienced an encounter with law enforcement that seems like a “stop and frisk,” and that resulted in your arrest, it is critical to understand whether your rights were violated and to seek help from a criminal defense attorney.

While Terry is a case which has been interpreted for decades and with complicated results, our Indianapolis criminal defense attorneys can provide you with general information about the Terry stop and frisk, and what rights you may have under the law.

Key Elements of Terry and the Stop and Frisk 

To understand the key elements of a Terry stop, and your rights, it is important to have clarity about the facts of this case. In Terry, a police officer saw three men on foot who appeared to the officer, based on his experience and his law enforcement training, to be casing a store for purposes of robbing it. He stopped the men, patted them down, and in patting one of them down, found a gun. The term “stop and frisk” refers to stopping a person and patting them down, as in this instance.

Under the Fourth Amendment, police must have reasonable suspicion to stop a person, and probable cause, and an applicable exception to the warrant requirement, to conduct a warrantless search. The US Supreme Court had to consider various issues in this case, including whether a “frisk” or “pat down” constituted a search, and whether it could be conducted without a warrant and without probable cause. The Court ruled that the police could conduct a stop and frisk without probable cause when the police officer reasonably believed the person had a weapon, and where the aim of the stop and frisk was “reasonably designed to discover guns, clubs, or other hidden instruments for the assault of the police officer.”

Over time, as the Supreme Court heard cases arising out of Terry, the ruling in Terry has been clarified. In the present, for a lawful stop and frisk, the law enforcement officer must have “reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.” Accordingly, for a “frisk” in this context, there is no requirement for probable cause as there would be for any other type of search.

Discrimination and Defending Against Evidence Obtained in a Stop and Frisk 

For years, legal scholars have pointed out how stop-and-frisk rules under Terry may actually violate a person’s Fourth Amendment rights, and how stop-and-frisk actions often are applied to people of color and are a tool of racial profiling. In some jurisdictions, courts have agreed that certain stop-and-frisk procedures have been discriminatory and have violated rights.

What do you need to know if you were stopped and frisked, and then arrested based on evidence found in the stop and frisk? You may be able to fight the allegations you are facing. It is possible that, with help from an attorney, you may be able to show that there was no reasonable suspicion for the stop and frisk you experienced.

Contact Our Indianapolis Criminal Defense Lawyers for Assistance 

You have rights against unreasonable search and seizure, and an experienced Indianapolis criminal defense attorney at Rigney Law LLC can help you as you prepare a defense in your case. Contact us today for assistance.

Sources:

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/1/

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/449/411/

digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1041&context=idaho-law-review