ipl-logo

Frisk Research Paper

1113 Words5 Pages

Police officers in the United States are given considerable amount of authority to perform their duties. New York City’s officers are given the authority to Stop, Question and Possibly Frisk (SQF) an individual based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. SQF is also known as the Terry Stop. This procedure is conducted when an officer has reasonable suspicion to stop and question a suspicious individual. Next, a possible frisk can be conducted if the officer has a reason to believe that the individual is carrying or conceals a weapon or other contraband. A Frisk is limited to a pat down of a person’s outer garment for the purpose of detecting any concealed weapons.
This tactic is derived from the 1968 Supreme Court case of Terry v. …show more content…

Mere suspicion, reasonable suspicion and Probable cause are the three standard of proof in the criminal justice system. But Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are the standard proof used in Terry v. Ohio. Mere suspicion is when law enforcement officers suspect criminal activity based on a hunch without actual proof. In this case the officer started with mere suspicion when he saw the Terry and Clinton alternately walking back and forth and pausing to stare inside the store window. However, mere suspicion does not permit law enforcement officers to stop, question or frisk an individual. But, the officer can continue observing the suspected individual(s) to see if any higher level of suspicion develops. Reasonable suspicion is the lowest standard of proof. It is a conclusion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime. According to Terry v. Ohio, Reasonable suspicion grants permission to an officer to conduct a stop, question and possibly frisk. In Terry v. Ohio, Reasonable suspicion was established when Terry and Clinton followed Katz towards the same location. This was when detective McFadden decided to follow the suspects and found all three men together. Probable cause is the highest standard of proof. It is a derived right from the 4th amendment. This is the standard of proof to make an arrest. It is evidence that points to the facts that …show more content…

Therefore it was important to further interrogation their suspicious action. Also for his own protection, the officer had the right to conduct a pat-down of the outer garment of these men. Because, Officer had reasonable cause to believe they might have weapons. The court said that conducting a frisk was the essential performance of the officer’s investigative duty. If a frisk was not conducted in this case, the officer probably would have to answer to a

Show More
Related

  • Hayes V. Wells Affirmative Hearing

    279 Words  | 2 Pages

    Procedural History: At the suppression hearing, Hayes said he asked Macabeo basic questions that he would normally ask on a stop. He thought the defendant was acting fidgety so he conducted a patdown which did not reveal anything suspicious. He removed his cell phone out of his pocket and handed it to Officer Raymond. Raymond searched the phone without consent from the defendant.

    Read More

  • David Floyd's Stop, Question And Frisk Report

    557 Words  | 3 Pages

    In response to public outcries to do more interventions in the community, the officers maintained that Floyd's behavior was suspicious and there had been a burglary pattern for that time of day in the neighborhood. The officers recorded Floyd's Stop and Frisk on the controversial UF250 form (Stop, Question and Frisk Report Worksheet), indicating that the suspected crime was a burglary. In response to the question “Was person searched?”, during the trial, the officers checked “No.” The three officers also claimed that they were unaware of any quotas or expectations that they complete a certain number of stops or UF250.

    Read More

  • Decrease In Stop-And-Frisk Procedures

    190 Words  | 1 Pages

    News reporters and media outlets frequently paint a picture that portrays the decrease in crime due to an increase in stop-and-frisk procedures. According to Evans and Williams (2015), those who agree with stop-and-frisk feel that this policy helps police officers to prevent crime from occurring. Many believe that it is drastically decreasing the amount of illegal firearms, therefore making cities safer. However, this is not the case as many often perceive it. According to the New York Civil Liberties Union (2012), on average less than one of every 800 stop-and-frisk scenarios resulted in the confiscation of a firearm.

    Read More

  • Nypd's Stop And Furisk Policy

    529 Words  | 3 Pages

    This standard is basically a “hunch” just a slight suspicion that a crime may have or is about to be committed. Because the standard is so low, it’s easy for officers to target somebody and conjure an explanation as to why they looked suspicious, therefore making it simple to use people for a particular consequence. For these reasons, the formalism ethical approach views NYPD stop and frisks as

    Read More

  • Explain How The Policy And Procedure To Establish A Chain Of Custody

    434 Words  | 2 Pages

    Who came into contact with it, why were the evidence being handle, and if any changes were made to the evidence or date during the time it was being handled. Before any search warrant can be issued, probable cause must be clearly established. This is so law enforcement can connect property or a thing to be searched with the commission of a specific crime.

    Read More

  • Iron Triangle Essay

    547 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Iron Triangle has impacted Racial Discrimination “American is Free Country” I thought that saying was true for the longest time but maybe that is only because I am white. I am free against discrimination and racial profiling. I am free to walk into stores, and not have eyes staring at me, making sure I am not stealing. I am free to sit on a plane and no one suspect me as terrorist.

    Read More

  • Substantial Evidence Case Study

    958 Words  | 4 Pages

    that evidence of both parties’ actions must be taken into consideration, and if these facts were presented to a reasonable person that individual should come to the same conclusion as the Board. The Court also found that lower courts have the power to overturn Board decisions, although these decisions should be respected to an extent they are still subject to scrutiny by the Substantial Evidence Test. In Allentown Mack Sales, the Court found that even though the Board’s decision was reasonable and not arbitrary, the decision is subject to the Substantial Evidence test. When viewing all of the facts, including evidence supporting the actions of Allentown Mack Sales, the Substantial Evidence test favored the petitioner. In the Service, Inc. section of the Allentown Mack Sales case the Court verified that when evidentiary support is stated within an act, adjudication and rulemaking are subject to that test.

    Read More

  • Comparing The Salem Witch Trials And The American Criminal Justice System

    478 Words  | 2 Pages

    Today, modern standards require the burden of proof be brought forth by the plaintiff, or prosecution in criminal cases. This means that the accused no longer has to prove they did not commit the crime, but the prosecution has to prove that all the evidence proves the accused did in fact commit the crime in question. Circumstantial evidence is not enough, but physical evidence, or forensic evidence is now required in modern courts for a conviction. Additionally, the modern standard when considering evidence, and for conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Stop And Frisk

    796 Words  | 4 Pages

    There has been many controversial issues about the “stop-and-frisk” law. One side believes that it is racially profiling the communities of minorities and the other side believes that it is helping communities rise away from violence. There is a lot of history and background on stop-and-frisk and how it originated in the United States, especially in different places around the world. This law has been very controversial even within the law itself, so controversial states are debating on getting rid of it completely. Many politicians speak on this tactic in both positive and negative ways and the statistical growths and decreases on this topic.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Reasonable Doubt In 12 Angry Men

    248 Words  | 1 Pages

    The term reasonable doubt is the standard of proof used in criminal trials. It is used when a person or judge can not say with moral certainty that a person is guilty. Reasonable doubt is used when people can not decide on whether the person is guilty or innocent. In the book 12 Angry Men, the character who started out as guilty verdict, but then changed his mind was Juror #8.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Stop And Frisk

    535 Words  | 3 Pages

    Stop and Frisk Stop and Frisk, the tactic that has been going on for only for short time, yet there seems to be racial tension already. But is this new information actually true or is it just good policing? According to Heather Mac Donald from the Manhattan Institute, says “what looks like racial profiling might just be good policing”. However according to Ranjana Natarajan from the Washington post “it’s clear that two issues need to be addressed: racial profiling and police use of excessive force.” Unfortunately we cannot have both ways.

    Read More

  • Direct Vs Circumstantial Evidence Essay

    1522 Words  | 7 Pages

    Lack of better evidence than acts and statements including that of co-conspirators in pursuance of the conspiracy requires appreciation of circumstantial evidence following the well established rule in criminal jurisprudence that circumstantial evidence can be reasonably made the basis of an accused person's conviction if it is of such a character that it is wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and is consistent only with his guilt... But in applying this principle, it is necessary to distinguish between facts which may be called primary or basic on the one hand and inference of facts to be drawn from them on the other... When it is held that a certain fact is proved, the question arises whether that fact leads to the inference of guilt of the accused person or not, and in dealing with this aspect of the problem the doctrine of benefit of doubt would apply and an inference of guilt can be drawn only if the proved fact is wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and is consistent only with his

    Read More

  • Tire Track Case

    1288 Words  | 6 Pages

    The State, the Court upheld the testimony of the deputies as admissible circumstantial evidence to show similarities because other evidence that was submitted that was able to link Brown to the crime

    Read More

  • Observation Of Administrative Hearing

    1202 Words  | 5 Pages

    He proceeded to differentiate civil courts from criminal courts. The first difference he noted between the two types of courts relates to the evidence. Judge Porter defined the terms of preponderance of the evidence and unreasonable. Preponderance of the evidence is used in civil courts and it takes into account the evidence presented and the testimonies given by both respondent and petitioner the judge then determines whether the respondent is liable or not liable. At least 51 percent of certainty is needed to convince the judge whether or not the respondent is liable.

    Read More

  • Burden Of Proof In Criminal Law

    819 Words  | 4 Pages

    As a necessary corollary to this, it must be understood that the defense is only required to cast reasonable doubt on the prosecution’s case in order to secure acquittal. Now, in respect of heinous offences such as stalking and rape, it is understood that the burden of proof has been reversed in order to ensure a greater possibility of conviction. However, this cannot be allowed to negate the very basics of the trial itself. The standard of reasonable doubt exists for the protection of the accused. Implicit in it is the understanding that since it is the prosecution that brought the case, they must take the full responsibility of proving it in such a way as to leave no reasonable doubt that the accused did in fact commit the crime which they charged him

    Read More

More about Frisk Research Paper

Open Document