CRJ 550 Active Learning 2
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Arizona Western College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
508
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by JudgeTitaniumStingray37
CRJ 550 Active Learning 2
Case: Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
As the judge in a case of Terry v. Ohio, I would approach the decision-making process
with a careful balance between the need for effective law enforcement and the protection of
individuals' constitutional rights. To begin, I would thoroughly examine the circumstances
leading up to the stop and frisk, considering the officer's observations and the context in which
they took place. I would evaluate whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to believe that the
individuals were involved in criminal activity and whether their conduct warranted an
investigative stop.
I would further analyze the specifics of the case to ensure that the police
officer's actions were within the confines of the law and the established precedents.
Next, I would assess the officer's decision to conduct a frisk, considering whether there
was a reasonable belief that the individuals were armed and posed a threat to the safety of the
officer or others in the vicinity. I would closely scrutinize whether the frisk was limited to a pat-
down of the outer clothing, and whether the scope of the search was justified by the perceived
threat. Moreover, I would consider any potential biases or profiling that may have influenced the
officer's actions, ensuring that the stop and frisk were not based on arbitrary factors such as race,
ethnicity, or other discriminatory grounds. Upholding the principles of equal protection under the
law and the prohibition of unreasonable searches, I would thoroughly examine the evidence and
testimonies to ensure that the officer's actions were based on specific, articulable facts and not on
generalized suspicions.
Reflective Response to Court’s Ruling
My decision as a judge accurately reflect the decision and reasoning of the Supreme
Court in Terry v. Ohio. The Court indeed found that the officer's actions were justified under the
circumstances, citing the necessity of protecting the officer's safety and the public's safety. The
Court determined that the officer had reasonable suspicion to believe that the individuals were
armed and dangerous, justifying the limited frisk for weapons. The Court's decision emphasized
the balance between law enforcement's authority and individual rights, setting a precedent for the
conditions under which a stop and frisk would be constitutionally permissible (
Windmueller,
2020)
. This case has since become a significant reference point in discussions surrounding the
limits of police authority and the protection of civil liberties in the United States.
References
Windmueller, E. J. (2020). Reasonable Articulable Suspicion-The Demise of Terry v. Ohio and
Individualized Suspicion.
U. Rich. L. Rev.
,
25
, 543.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 1968 U.S. LEXIS 1345, 44
Op. 2d 383 (Supreme Court of the United States June 10, 1968, Decided).
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help