Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The rules for the policy are contained in the state's criminal procedure law section 140.50 and based on the decision of the US Supreme Court in the case of Terry v. Ohio. In 2016, a reported 12,404 stops were made under the stop-and-frisk program. The stop-and-frisk program has previously taken place on a much wider scale.
When police stop and search a pedestrian, this is commonly known as a stop and frisk. When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop. If the police stop a motor vehicle on minor infringements in order to investigate other suspected criminal activity, this is known as a pretextual stop. Additional rules apply to stops that occur ...
Stop and search or Stop and frisk is a term used to describe the powers of the police to search a person, place or object without first making an arrest. Examples in specific jurisdictions include: Powers of the police in England and Wales § Search without arrest in England and Wales
How Trump would execute a national stop and frisk policy is unclear, as policing falls under state and local laws, said Delores Jones-Brown, professor emeritus, City Colleges of New York, John Jay ...
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the court ruled that it is constitutional for American police to "stop and frisk" a person they reasonably suspect to be armed and involved in a crime.
"Stop and identify" laws in different states that appear to be nearly identical may be different in effect because of interpretations by state courts. For example, California "stop and identify" law, Penal Code §647(e) had wording [37] [38] [39] similar to the Nevada law upheld in Hiibel, but a California appellate court, in People v.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) — stop and frisk for weapons OK for officer safety; Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40 (1968) — companion case to Terry. Peters v. New York (1968) — companion case to Terry contained in Sibron
When a search for weapons is also authorized, the procedure is known as a stop and frisk. To justify the stop, a law enforcement officer must be able to point to "specific and articulable facts" that would indicate to a reasonable person that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed.