In this case of Illinois v. Wardlow, Sam Wardlow, a 44-year old black man was wrongly searched after he was apparently seen acting ‘suspicious’ when he ran after he saw four police cars driving up. He was then chased by Timothy Nolan, a veteran police officer, as he believed Wardlow as guilty. The officers believed him to be in a ‘high crime area’. They caught up to Wardlow and frisked him. During the search, they found a handgun.…
In particular the question arises if it is a violation of “Stop and Frisk” under the Fourth Amendment based on the suspicions of the officer at the time of the immediate contact with the petitioner. The issue specifically refers to whether the officer in this case had the right to “Stop and Frisk” the subject without probable cause based on the observations of the officer and recovered dangerous weapons from the subjects…
The frisk was legal because the cop had reason to believe the defendant had a weapon. But once the cop saw that the defendant was unarmed the search should have stopped. By not doing so and continuing the cop violated the defendant’s fourth amendment rights. He did not have probable cause which is needed to do a full search. The case was dismissed due to the evidence being suppressed because of…
“In 2011, 53 percent of those stopped were African-American, 34 percent were Latino and only nine percent were white and it was about the same numbers in the first three months of 2012.” Although statistics may show that African American and Hispanics commit majority of violent crimes that happens within a community, not every African American and Hispanic person will commit a crime or is a criminal. This factor is not a reasonable suspicion or probable cause for an officer to stop, question, and frisk everyone from these minority groups repeatedly to the point of harassment. Often time police…
He performed a frisk and discovered illegal concealed weapons. The three men were convicted and appealed claiming that the frisk violated their Fourth Amendment right. The Supreme Court did not overturn the conviction, stating that the law enforcement officer had "reasonable grounds" for suspecting that a criminal suspect may be armed, he may pat down the outer layer of the suspect's clothing for weapons. This outcome represents a ruling that was made in the interest of the Common…
Stop-and-Frisk Policy Review According to the Washington Post article “Here’s what you need to know about stop and frisk — and why the courts shut it down” by Dylan Matthews, Stop and Frisk is “an NYPD policy wherein police will detain and question pedestrians, and potentially search them, if they have a reasonable suspicion that the pedestrian in question committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or a Penal Law misdemeanor” (Matthews). This means that if a person appears suspicious of having commit or being about to commit a crime according to a police officer then that police officer has the right to question, search and detain this particular individual. This seems like something that would benefit society, preventing crime and ridding society of wrongdoers. However, there are serious issues with this policy.…
As well the court also stated that detaining a person to require him to identify himself with lack of evidence against him/her violates their Fourth Amendment right. The Fourth Amendment requires such action,or that the seizure should be carried out pursuant to plan embodying explicit,neutral limitations of individual officers. In other words, a police officer can’t arrest you,detain you,or search you without a search warrant or an arrest warnat. Though there are some expectations on getting search or being detained,like for instances if a police officer asks your permission to search in your belongings and you agree then that’s not considered an intrusion of your privacy because you allowed him/her to search in your belongings. Same goes for being arrested because in order to be charged with a crime police officers must have reasonable suspicion and enough evidence to charge you with that crime.…
It is just a form of racial profiling because over half the percent of people they stop are African Americans. We are suspected to have some form of a weapon on contraband, or us and if it just happened that someone they stopped and frisked did they would get charged. In these cases whites never seem to cause suspicious among cops. It is easier for police to just be able to go into urban areas and criminalize the people there because it is cheaper for their police force than to go into suburban areas where there can be drugs or contraband inside of there houses and having to look into many of the crimes police would need a search warrant because the crimes in these areas are typically done behind closed doors. Because we look suspicious to a specific police officer they take this as an advantage and use this as a style of policing it gives them to right to just stop and search me as If I was a criminal.…
Supreme Court., which essentially and collectively stated that an LEO has the “right to make a temporary detention based on reasonable suspicion or a traffic stop even if that stop was primarily for the basis of checking out possible criminal behavior for which the officer lacked reasonable suspicion or probable cause” (“Racial Profiling as”, n.d., para. 2). One of the cases that pulled us into the reasonable suspicion was the Terry v. Ohio case that leaded to the probable cause standard of our Fourth Amendment. Another case is the Whren v. U.S., where the judge replied to claims of a possible traffic stop by District of Columbia LEO in a neighborhood high drug activity…
Racial profiling is behind a lot of citizens being falsely accused of a crime they did not commit. Law enforcement practices the use of racial profiling to identify criminals who are doing wrong in society or look suspicious. Police officers use racial profiling in a negative way. They judge by the color of skin, what we look like, what we wear, and what other people in their ethnicity make of their repetition. Evidence proves that police officers abuse their power to find potential criminals.…
The only reason why people are against “stop and frisk” is because the people believe that it’s unconstitutional. They think that “stop and frisk” is an invasion of privacy, which could be true, but the Second Court of Appeals decision said that stop and frisk is constitutional and plays a critical role in saving lives…
Stop and frisk should not be legal because many times these searches do…
Racial Profiling goes against this right and should be banned, or have harsher punishments when is displayed. Furthermore, cops are taking it upon themselves to kill many innocent people, there needs to be a better way to protect themselves without having to resort into taking someone’s life. As John F. Kennedy states “The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human lives…” (Kennedy pg1. 1961).…
This brings the topic of racial profiling forward. Racial profiling is the system taking actions or certain behaviors out on an individual not for their actions, but purely on the fact of their race. Racial profiling is outlawed in many states in America; however, this does not mean that racial profiling is not still present within the states. It is the systems job to uphold the law and protect citizens while treating them justly, but unfortunately there are some that will shout probable cause for a stop and search, when the only reasoning behind it is…
Introduction Stop and frisk tactics have been used to preserve public safety and officer well-being. A stop and frisk is a non-intrusive police stop and pat-down based on the reasonable suspicion in relation to a crime that has happened, will happen, or is in the process of being carried out (Cornell Law School, 2017). Stop and frisk situations are highly common and the reported instances have increased by approximately 7% annually (Hovhannisyan, 2006). However, the approach is highly controversial because it operates primarily on officers' perceptions and opinions, which opens the door to personal prejudices dictating the usage. This executive summary includes the advantages and disadvantages involved in stop and frisk procedures as well as the constitutionality and recommendations to improve the approach.…