Case Brief On Terry V, Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 1967 – Case Study Example

Running Head: Case Brief: Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S 1967 FACTS: In this case, a plain-clothes police officer was observing the petitioner, Terry and two other men. The police officer, out of suspicion stopped the three men and frisked or searched them for weapons. He found out that Terry and one of the men were in the possession of a weapon. Terry was arrested and convicted of being in possession of a concealed weapon. The petitioner was sentenced to three years in jail (US Supreme Court Media, 2010).
ISSUE:
1. Whether warrantless frisking and arrest of Terry and the three men is in violation of the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and apprehension
2. Whether there is historic evidence from the common law that provides for imprisonment from warrantless arrest
3. Whether the three men’s case was one where petitioner was arrested, humiliated and inconvenienced in any way other than normally allowed by law
HOLDING:
1. No, the warrantless arrest was not a violation of the Fourth amendment, since the police officer’s judgment was reasonable, as he could present the weapon as evidence against the petitioner
2. Yes, there is some historical evidence providing to the fact that arrest should be limited to jail-able offenses, but there exists more evidence that indicates this was not the norm within the common law
3. No, the arrest was not undertaken in any manner inconsistent with law
RATIONALE:
In the court ruling, an 8-to-1 decision was concluded; the Court held that the search that the police officer undertook was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. This is because of the fact that the weapons got could be introduced into evidence against Terry. Furthermore, the Court found out that the officer acted on more than a "hunch" and that "a reasonably prudent man would have been warranted in believing the petitioner was armed and therefore presented a threat to the officers safety while he was investigating his suspicious behavior. The court found that it was in the best interest of the officers’ security, that the frisking, apprehension, conviction and subsequent sentencing were done.
Reference
US Supreme Court Media, (2010): Terry v. Ohio. Retrieved August 19, 2010 from: http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_67/