The precedent was set in Terry v. Ohio, when the courts ruled that it was sensible for an officer to carry out a restricted search and, if required, seizure of weaponries on an individual that the officer realistically considers could be armed. The result of the Terry case was useful in the case of Michigan v. Long. In this particular case, the standard of the police search in the Terry case was expanded to include motor vehicles. According to the Michigan v. Long case, the court ruled that the police were within their rights of conducting a “Terry’s” search of the person of interest vehicle. In this case, the evidence gained from the search was not discarded as a violation of the person’s Fourth Amendment, but rather seen as being prudently
In the article “The Statistical Debate Behind The Stop-and-Frisk Verdict”, John Cassidy analyzes the conclusion of Judge Scheindlin in which states that Stop and Frisk amounts to a policy of indirect racial profiling. In the analysis it is mentioned that Judge Scheindlin feels that the these methods of approach to prevent crime is unconstitutional. She challenges this by using the four and fourteenth amendment which police violate with stop-and-frisk which is an unreasonable search, and the discrimination towards Blacks and Latinos by being stopped a lot more frequently than whites, which is not equal protection under the law. Ultimately Cassidy’s report is to convey Judge Scheindlin’s stance on the method of policing being used today.
Per this rule, the issue is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. David Riley was driving with expired tags when he was arrested. The police impounded the car when they realized that his license was suspended. Policy states that when a car is impounded, an inventory search must be conducted. He was arrested for possession of loaded firearms.
The terms “stop” and “frisk” are commonly used interchangeably. There are many similarities and differences between the two terms. Although they may be done within the same search, they are not the same. A stop is done with a reasonable cause.
1. Give an example of a mala prohibita crime and describe why it is mala prohibita. An example of a mala prohibita crime would be driving over the speed limit. When people do this they are breaking the law, but they are not doing it in a malicious way; they are not trying to be bad.
Search and seizure law is actually one of the detrimental issues in the criminal justice system. Many officers are sometimes faced with constraints and are not able to work properly given that they fail to understand and distinguish between situations when search warrant are required ( Del, 2014). In incidents that have lawful arrest as well as when there is a plain view exception. In areas where consent is given by a person in authority, there is no need for the search warrant required together with the police stops and frisking a person whom they have a reasonable suspicion on of an act that is equated to a crime. Another example is when a situation is an emergency and there is a hot pursuit given the evidence may disappear before the warrant
The job of the police officers is to protect all citizens from any threat and help us to be safe on the streets. Stop and frisk is a practice that the New York City Police Department uses as a way to fight crime, however, stop and frisk is unjust and has resulted in racial discrimination by officers, as well as an abuse of power. Over the years many civilians have been stopped and frisked by the police, this irritates some people as they feel they are stopped purposely or for no reason. So can police frisking in some cases go too far?
It was July 5, 2016 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. A man named Alton Sterling was selling CD’s outside of the Triple S Food Market. A homeless man approached him and asked Alton for money. Alton showed the man his gun, and told the man to leave him alone. The men called 911, the police officers showed up, and soon after gunshots fired.
1 Cristina Castaneda Professor Sharifian GOVT 2305 11 February 2018 Civil Rights versus Civil Liberties Civil rights and Civil liberties are well known for the type of impact they have had on our government. Civil liberties are specific rights, that are protected from the government. Civil rights are equal protection under the laws. The courts have ruled on civil rights as equal rights for all citizens no matter where you come from, or who you are.
Moreover, the aftermath of incarceration for convicted African-American felons entails that they are unable to vote. The constitution implements this idea that anybody can vote regardless of race or gender, but criminals are unable to vote. Criminals occupy the lower caste in society meaning that nobody wants to be like them ,stereotypes are associated with them, and nobody wants to advocate for them or their rights. Michelle Alexander explicitly describes the ongoing oppression by stating that “ Like his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great great-grandfather, he has been denied the right to participate in our electoral democracy” ( Alexander). Alexander is talking about the black man when she says “he” because majority of the