Using the guidelines, in sequence, that were set in Terry v. ...

[rayancarla1]

Using the guidelines, in sequence, that were set in Terry v. Ohio, create a police department procedure for stopping and frisking an individual. Be specific
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

The Supreme Court in Terry v. Ohio (1968) set guidelines, in sequence, for both a stop and a frisk. If a police officer goes beyond the guidelines for the frisk, and reaches his hand into a suspect's coat pocket and pulls out a baggie containing a white powdery substance, that lab results identify as cocaine, will the prosecution be able to use the cocaine? Why or why not? What could the officer have done differently?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[ky860224]

Answer to Question 1

Possible departmental procedure:
When an officer observes unusual conduct that leads him or her reasonably to
conclude, in the light of his or her experience, that criminal activity is about to
take place or has just taken place, and that the person with whom he or she is
dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, the officer may stop the
person.
The officer must identify himself or herself as a police officer.
The officer can then make reasonable inquiries by asking questions of the
person stopped.
Based on the responses to the questions and the officer's presence, does the
officer continue to believe the person may be armed and presently dangerous
to the officer or to others, the officer may conduct a pat-down for weapons
only, by touching the outer clothing of the person.

Answer to Question 2

The prosecution will not be able to use the cocaine, because a frisk is for weapons,
not for drugs. Any evidence found in such a search (that is more than a frisk for
weapons) would be an unreasonable search and seizure and subject to the
Exclusionary Rule. The officer should have conducted a frisk for weapons, then
asked the suspect to empty his pockets, seeking consent for the search.