NoemiDelgado

5/19
Minnesotav.Dickerson

Twopoliceofficers,inamarkedpolicecar,werepatrollinganareaonthenorthsideof
Minneapolis.The12unitapartmentbuildingonMorangAvenueNorthwasknowntobeacrack
housebecauseofthemanycomplaintsofdrugsalesinsidethebuildingandtheprevious
searchwarrantsoftheapartmentcomplex.Knowingthis,thepoliceofficerscarefullyobserved
respondentleavingtheapartmentbuilding.Whenrespondentsawthesquadcarandmadeeye
contactwiththeofficerhesuspiciouslystoppedandturnedtowalktheotherway.Basedon
respondentssuspiciousactionsandthefactthathewasleavingacrackhouse,theofficers
stoppedhimandconductedapatdownsearch.Therewerenoweaponsfoundbuttheofficerfelt
alumpinrespondentsjacket.Theofficermanipulatedthebagbetweenhisfingersandcame
totheconclusionthatitwascrackcocainewrappedincellophane.Hereachedintorespondents
jacketpocketandtookoutabagwithonefifthofagramofcocaine.Respondentwascharged
withpossessionofacontrolledsubstance.Thelegalquestionbroughtupbythiscaseis,May
policeofficersseizenonthreateningcontrabanddetectedduringaprotectivepatdownsearchof
thesortpermittedbyTerry?
Respondentcanclaimprotectionunderthefourthamendment,accordingtoCAv
Ciraolo,becausehewasstoppedbyanactorofthestateandclearlyhadstanding.
Respondentscontrabandwasinhispocketwherehehasareasonableexpectationofprivacy.
TherulingthatmustbeexaminedtoanswerthelegalquestionathandisTerryv.Ohio,which
statesthat,Whenanofficerisjustifiedinbelievingthattheindividualwhosesuspicious
behaviorheisinvestigatingatcloserangeisarmedandpresentlydangeroustotheofficerorto
others...heisentitledfortheprotectionofhimselfandothersintheareatoconductacarefully
limitedsearchoftheouterclothingofsuchpersonsinanattempttodiscoverweaponswhich
mightbeusedtoassaulthim.Thisrulingexplainsthelimitsofapatdownsearch,whichshould
onlybeusedtofindweaponsthatmayputthepublicindanger.
AccordingtotherulingfromTerryv.Ohio,theMinneapolispoliceofficersshouldhave
onlybeensearchingtherespondentforweapons.Whentheofficersfoundnoweapons,theydid
nothavetherighttocontinuesearchingrespondentsperson.Asmalllumpthatfeelslikecrack
cocaineisinnowayadangerousweapon.Whentheofficerexaminedthesmalllumpin
respondentspocket,slidingitbetweenhisfingers,hewasincompleteviolationofrespondents
fourthamendment.TheTerryv.Ohiorulingwasputinplacetoprotectofficersandcitizensfrom
peoplewhoarearmedanddangerous,nottoallowpoliceofficerstooversteppeoplesprivacy
withoutawarrant.
Inconclusion,policeofficersdonothavetherighttoseizenonthreateningcontraband
detectedduringaprotectivepatdown.TheTerryv.Ohiorulingmakesitclearthatprotective
patdownsmayonlybeusedtofindandseizedangerousweapons.Therefore,theMinneapolis
policeofficersviolatedrespondentsfourthamendmentwhentheytheirsearchwentpastthe
limitssetbyTerryv.Ohio.