Open Always
Email: support@globalcompose.com Call Now! +1-315 515-4588
Open Always
Email: support@globalcompose.com Call Now! +1-315 515-4588

Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio

This sample paper on (Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio) was uploaded by one our contributors and does not necessarily reflect how our professionals write our papers. If you would like this paper removed from our website, please contact us our Contact Us Page.

A Database of over Million Scholarly Resources. Start your Search Now

Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio

Introduction

Terry v. Ohio was a court case conducted within the United States Supreme Court in 1968. Judges at the Supreme Court ruled the case in relation to rights awarded to citizens based on the Fourth Amendment. The case therefore determined if police officers ought to frisk, pat down, search, and seizure a suspect without a probable cause to arrest. It was a major landmark in determining if police officers are allowed to base their suspicions in conducting searches and seizures on suspects. Legal officers within the police force ought to conduct themselves with dignity, respect, and facts. However, they often act based on their gut feelings and suspicions. For example, if they suspect a person is about to, has, or will commit a crime, they often search the individual to affirm their qualms. More so, if they suspect the individual is armed and dangerous, especially in relation to public safety, they also conduct searches and seizures (Patrick & Gary, 2009).

The Supreme Court, however, asserts that all legal officers ought to conduct searches and seizures based on specific and articulated facts. Thus, legal officers should not violate citizens’ right to privacy by conducting searches and seizures based on mere hunches and suspicions. Patting down, frisking, searching, and seizures are acts undertaken by police officers among pedestrians, passengers, and drivers. They involve the legal officer stopping, detaining, and searching an individual to correspond or contradict their suspicions that the person is potentially armed thus harmful and dangerous (Devallis, 2011).

Summary of the Terry v. Ohio Case

Police officers are tasked with providing and enhancing public security. The court case between John Terry and the State evaluated and analyzed the following legal facts. First, maintaining and sustaining public safety is important among States and the country. Thus, police officers ought to undertake their roles and responsibilities effectively and efficiently. However, in order for legal officers to undertake their jobs, they also need to be safe and protected. This is because citizens can be either criminals or victims. Thus, criminals interfering with public security also endanger the police officers’ lives. Police officers should therefore be vigil in ensuring they are safe as they safeguard public persons and property (Devallis, 2011).

The case also revealed that police officers act based on probable causes and reasonable suspicions. If they suspect an individual is about to commit a crime and hinder public security they should act accordingly. However, they are required to acquire a search warrant before conducting searches and seizures on suspected criminals especially in public. This is because the United States Constitution ensures citizens rights to privacy are respected and sustained in relation to the Fourth Amendment. Thus, conducting searches publicly especially among innocent citizens is fundamentally wrong and violating constitutional rights to privacy (Devallis, 2011).

Discussion

In 1968, John Terry was frisked, found guilty of secretly concealing a weapon. He was arrested and sentenced to three years in jail. A legal police officer from Cleveland conducted the search after he observed Terry and his friend act suspiciously outside a departmental store window. The officer was suspicious that the two were planning to invade and carry out criminal activities within the store. Based on this hunch and suspicion, the Cleveland police officer introduced himself to the two individuals as a legal officer in the police force. He requested to know their names before patting them down outside the departmental store. He located the illegal weapon on Terry. However, it was hidden underneath his coat. In order to access and seize it, he removed Terry’s coat and confiscated the revolver prompting an arrest (Patrick & Gary, 2009).

Under the United States Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment awards citizens a right against unreasonable frisking and patting down described as searching. In June 1968, the United States Supreme Court had to decide on the case. This case attracted and involved sentiments and concerns from lower courts. It was crucial to determine if the Cleveland police officer had violated Terry’s Fourth Amendment rights (Patrick & Gary, 2009).

The Fourth Amendment asserts that citizens are and should be protected from unwarranted searches by legal officers. The searches should not be conducted on their bodies, houses, cars, and other personal spaces without a warrant. Police and legal officers take an oath to affirm that before they conduct searches and seizures, they ought to present a warrant. However, the warrant should not be presented based on mere hunches and suspicions. Instead, it should be based on facts (Devallis, 2011).

It is therefore evident that the Cleveland police officer violated Terry’s Fourth Amendment rights. This is because he neither presented a search warrant nor was he mandated to conduct the search and seizure in a public place. He should have transferred Terry and his friend to a police station. Consequently, he should have sought for a search warrant before proceeding with the search. Conversely, he should have introduced himself as a police officer, read them their legal rights, transferred them to a police station, and conducted the search. Thus, he should have conducted the search to avoid invading the suspects’ rights to privacy in public especially if they had been innocent (Devallis, 2011).

 

 

 Chief Justice William Orville Douglas Opinion

In ruling the Terry v. Ohio case, Justice Douglas listed the following facts. First, police officers are mandated to prevent, stop, and lower crime in the country to ensure and enhance public security. Secondly, police officers can occasionally act based on the present circumstances, especially if there is a security threat. In such occasions, legal officers should ensure they are acting accordingly and appropriately. This includes approaching the suspect appropriately, explaining their suspicions, and conducting their investigations without necessarily violating citizens’ constitutional rights in relation to the Fourth Amendment. The justice however also asserted that their actions should not necessarily be based on probable causes in conducting searches and making arrests (Patrick & Gary, 2009).

Justice Douglas opinion, therefore, awarded legal and police officers the right to conduct searches and seizures. This is aimed at ensuring their roles and responsibilities are effective and efficient in enhancing and sustaining public security in the country. If a police officer believes and trusts the suspected individual is a security threat, he/she should act accordingly and appropriately. This involves the police officer searching the suspected individual for illegal arms and weapons, such as a guns and pistols. According to Justice Douglas, the Cleveland police officer did not infringe human rights awarded under the Fourth Amendment. This is because the police officer fulfilled the following two conditions. First, he conducted the search through a physical investigation in accordance to legal requirements. Secondly, the investigation was conducted after the police officer reasonably suspected Terry was carrying illegal and dangerous weapons capable of interfering with public security. Thus, according to Justice Douglas reasonable suspicion warranted the Cleveland police officer to conduct the search and confiscate the pistol (Patrick & Gary, 2009).

Reasonable suspicion is a lesser standard to probable cause. Probable causes are based on facts indicating that an individual is actually a security threat. For example, after the Cleveland officer found the pistol under Terry’s clothes, his reasonable suspicion developed to probable cause. Warrants to conduct searches and seizures should therefore be issued based on probable causes. According to Barbara Shapiro, probable causes originated from legal and cultural doctrines, values, and philosophies. Probable causes are crucial is ensuring legal, social, religious, and economic factors foster growth and development in a community (Barbara, 1993).

Doctrines and philosophies under probable causes, therefore, legally evolve based on the degree of growth among communities. For example, legal officers in warzone areas should conduct searches for illegal weapons without necessarily presenting warrants. This is because their suspicions that citizens are in possession of illegal weapons thus fueling the war are based on probable causes. However, legal officers in a peaceful and stable nation should use search warrants to avoid violating citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights. They should not conduct searches in cars, offices, houses, and other personal areas without a probable cause which facilitates acquisition of a warrant (Barbara, 1993).

The Terry v. Ohio case was based on two parts. Firstly, the police officer’s actions infringed John Terry’s rights under the Fourth Amendment. However, the infringement was reasonable as the officer was able to prevent and reduce crime within Ohio. Thus, the police officer’s actions were reasonable and acceptable. This is because they were reasonably and appropriately undertaken based on scope of the circumstances during which Terry was act suspiciously. This however does not leave police officers with too much discretion when making a determination to stop and search a suspicious individual. This is because they are trained, qualified, and experienced legal officers able to distinguish between criminals and victims. More so, they are tasked with ensuring public security is maintained. In the field, they should apply skills acquired from training and experiences. This can include making observations to determine if public safeties are compromised. Thus, this case affirms police officers ought to be vigilant in order to be effective and efficient in their tasks (Devallis, 2011).

The Supreme Court declared probable causes should be based and relate on the totality of the circumstances. There are different and diverse factors that shape the totality of incidents. In the case of Terry v. Ohio, the police officer ought to have acquired specialized knowledge from training in relation to behavioral patterns among criminals. He had served thirty nine years in the police force and thirty five years as a detective. He therefore used his extensive level of experience to shape the totality of circumstances that Terry and his friend were about to commit a crime. Secondly, observations raising suspicions can also shape the totality of circumstances. The police officer’s personal observations on Terry’s suspicious behavior shaped the totality of circumstances. Lastly, the officer’s analytical and investigative skills and qualifications also shaped the totality of circumstances in the case. This is because the police officer’s investigative inferences facilitated him to search, locate, and seize the pistol underneath Terry’s coat. However, these factors can be too subjective to establish a probable cause because police officers differ in relation to skills and experiences. For example, a police officer who has served in the force for one year cannot relate with a counterpart who has served for more than ten years. They differ in investigative inferences and level of specialized knowledge based on their experiences in the police force (Devallis, 2011).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the court held that a police officer violates a person’s Fourth Amendment rights if he/she accosts and restrains him/her from walking way. This assertion is valid because the law asserts that persons ought to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. For example, criminals serving time in prison cannot claim their Fourth Amendment rights are violated.  However, if a person is detained, investigated, and found innocent their Fourth Amendment rights are violated for that period of time. Thus, Fourth Amendment rights are terminated after a person is found guilty and detained in prison.

 

References

Barbara, S. (1993). Beyond Reasonable Doubt and Probable Cause: Historical Perspectives on the Anglo-American Law of Evidence, University of California Press.

Devallis, R. (2011). Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion, The Law Enforcement Magazine.

Patrick, L. O., & Gary, A. (2009). Terry v. Ohio (1968) Supreme Court Decision: A Critical Review, University of Wisconsin-Platteville.

Sharing is: CARING

Are you looking for homework writing help? Click on Order Now button below to Submit your assignment details.

Homework Writing Help
We Can Help you with this Assignment right now!
Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio

Are you looking for homework writing help on (Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio)?Well, you can either use the sample paper provided to write your paper or you could contact us today for an original paper. If you are looking for an assignment to submit, then click on ORDER NOW button or contact us today. Our Professional Writers will be glad to write your paper from scratch.

 

We ensure that assignment instructions are followed, the paper is written from scratch. If you are not satisfied by our service, you can either request for refund or unlimited revisions for your order at absolutely no extra pay. Once the writer has completed your paper, the editors check your paper for any grammar/formatting/plagiarism mistakes, then the final paper is sent to your email.

Privacy| Confidentiality

Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio

We do not share your personal information with any company or person. We have also ensured that the ordering process is secure; you can check the security feature in the browser. For confidentiality purposes, all papers are sent to your personal email. If you have any questions, contact us any time via email, live chat or our phone number.

Our Clients Testimonials

  • I appreciate help on the assignment. It was hard for me but am good to go now

    Impact of pollution on Environment
  • Am happy now having completed the very difficult assignment

    Creative Message Strategies
  • Your writer did a fine job on the revisions. The paper is now ok

    Ethics: Theory and Practice
  • The paper was so involving but am happy it is done. Will reach you with more assignments

    Title: Privatization in or of America
  • I expected perfection in terms of grammar and I am happy. Lecturer is always on our head but was pleased with my paper. Once again, thanks a lot

    Title: Bundaberg Inquiry
  • The paper looks perfect now, thank to the writer

    Health Care Systems
  • You helped me complete several other tasks as you handled paper. wonna thank you

    Critique Paper on Political Change

Related Articles

Sample Essay on Terry v. Ohio

Analyze the Nursing Roles in providing Comprehensive care in a Variety of Community Health Settings

Community Settings This week’s graded topics relate to the following Course Outcomes (COs). CO3: Plan prevention and population-focused interventions for vulnerable populations using professional clinical judgment and evidence-based practice. (POs...
Read More

Case Study Assignment on Ethical Issues in Asia-Pacific business

Case study assignment on Ethical Issues in Asia-Pacific business For this assignment, students will write a case study report in 2,000 words based on a case identified with circumstance or...
Read More

Sample Report Paper on The proposed reward system and strategy for the big city university

A good reward system should motivate workers. It should also attract and retain the same workers. On the contrary, a bad reward system does not do either of these things....
Read More

Management of PCOS through Homoeopathy-A case report

Introduction PCOS is the acronym for Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. It is the most common endocrine disorder of women in their reproductive period manifested by irregular menstrual cycles and polycystic ovaries,...
Read More

Get more from us…

Would you like this sample paper to be sent to your email or would you like to receive weekly articles on how to write your assignments? You can simply send us your request on how to write your paper and we will email you a free guide within 24-36 hours. Kindly subscribe below!

Email Address: support@globalcompose.com