DevonLee

EliCameron
EnglishIII
May16,2014
Minnesotav.Dickerson

OntheeveningofNovember9,1989,twoMinneapolispoliceofficerswerepatrollinganarea
onthecitysnorthsideinamarkedsquadcar.Atabout8:15p.m,,oneoftheofficersobserved
respondentleavinga12unitapartmentbuildingonMorganAvenueNorth.Theofficer,having
previouslyrespondedtocomplaintsofdrugsalesinthebuildingshallwaysandhavingexecutedseveral
searchwarrantsonthepremises,consideredthebuildingtobeanotoriouscrackhouse.Accordingto
testimonycreditedbythetrialcourt,respondentbeganwalkingtowardthepolicebut,uponspottingthe
squadcarandmakingeyecontactwithoneoftheofficers,abruptlyhaltedandbeganwalkinginthe
oppositedirection.Hissuspicionaroused,thisofficerwatchedasrespondentturnedandenteredan
alleyontheothersideoftheapartmentbuilding.Baseduponrespondentsseeminglyevasiveactions
andthefactthathehadjustleftabuildingknownforcocainetraffic,theofficersdecidedtostop
respondentandinvestigatefurther.
Theofficerspulledtheirsquadcarintothealleyandorderedrespondenttostopandsubmittoa
patdownsearch.Thesearchrevealednoweapons,buttheofficerconductingthesearchdidtake
interestinasmalllumpinrespondentsnylonjacket.Theofficerlatertestified:
[A]sIpatsearchedthefrontofhisbody,Ifeltalump,asmalllump,inthefrontpocket.I
examineditwithmyfingersanditslitanditfelttobealumpofcrackcocaineincellophane.Theofficer
thenreachedintorespondentspocketandretrievedasmallplasticbagcontainingonefifthofonegram
ofcrackcocaine.RespondentwasarrestedandchargedinHennepinCountyDistrictCourtwith
possessionofacontrolledsubstance.Nowthatweknowwhatissuehasoccurred,wemustanswer
thelegalquestion:Maypoliceofficersseizenonthreateningcontrabanddetectedduringaprotective
patdownsearchofthesortpermittedbyTerry?Inotherwords,werethepolicewithintheirrightsto
seizethesmallplasticbagofcocaine.
AccordingtothecaseTerryv.Ohio,aruleisestablishedthatstateswhereapoliceofficer
observesunusualconductwhichleadshimreasonablytoconcludeinlightofhisexperiencethatcriminal
activitymaybeafootandthatthepersonswithwhomheisdealingmaybearmedandpresently
dangerous,heisentitledfortheprotectionofhimselfandothersintheareatoconductacarefully
limitedsearchoftheouterclothingofsuchpersonsinanattempttodiscoverweaponswhichmightbe
usedtoassaulthim.Theruleclearlystatesthatapoliceofficercanconductasearchoftheouter
clothinginanattempttodiscoverweaponsthatmightbeusedindefencetoassaulthim.
Beforetheofficerssearchedrespondent,theyhadreasonablesuspicionthatrespondentwasup
tocriminalactivity.Thisisbecauseoneoftheofficersinthesquadcarstatedthat,havingpreviously
respondedtocomplaintsofdrugsalesinthebuildingshallwaysandhaveexecutedseveralsearch
warrantsonthepremises,consideredthebuildingtobeanotoriouscrackhouse.Butbecausethe
officerdeterminedthatthelumpwascontrabandonlyaftersqueezing,slidingandotherwise
manipulatingthecontentsofthedefendantspocket,itisnowconsideredunconstitutional.Itis
unconstitutionalbecausethesearchthattheofficerconductedwastoonlysearchforanyweaponsthat
maybeusedtoassaulttheofficer.Butbecausetheofficerstatedthatitfelttobeasmalllumpofcrack
cocaineincellophane,healreadyknewthatitwasnotaweaponandstillfurtherinvestigatedthe
pocketthenseizingthebagofdrugs.
Theofficerssearchedrespondentwithreasonablesuspicionbutbecauseoneoftheofficers
knewthatrespondentdidnothaveaweaponinhispocket,heunconstitutionallysearchedandseized
thedrugsfromhispocket.Thiscaseraisesthequestionofwhenofficersareallowedtoseize
nonthreateningcontrabandfromsuspects.Inorderforanythingtobeseizedonthesceneofanarrest,
itmustbejustifiedbytheruleestablishedintheTerryv.Ohiocase.