Back in 1968, Justice William O. Douglas warned in a dissenting opinion in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, that the Court was opening a Pandora\u27s box by eschewing the traditional probable cause standard for Fourth Amendment search and seizures in traffic stop cases, and permitting warrantless detentions based merely on reasonable suspicion. More than a quarter-century later, the confusion over the reasonable suspicion approach is still commanding the Supreme Court\u27s attention. A pair of cases on the justices\u27 argument calendar this spring address the tension between legitimate traffic stops and those based on pretext
In State v. Williams the Washington Supreme Court attempted to set forth specific criteria for deter...
The Court began its opinion in Winston by putting to one side the procedural protections of the war...
Regulation of Terry stops of pedestrians by police requires articulation of the reasonable and indiv...
Back in 1968, Justice William O. Douglas warned in a dissenting opinion in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1...
Police officers sometimes need flexibility to respond appropriately to a variety of factual situatio...
The plethora of law review articles and cases on search and seizure demonstrates the confusion and f...
The killing of George Floyd, along with other high profile cases of police officers using fatal forc...
Requiring that officers have suspicion of specific crimes before they seize people during stops or a...
The Fourth Amendment to the Federal Constitution protects individuals against unreasonable searches ...
In Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court granted law enforcement broad power to perform a limited stop an...
Removing laws to pursue the lawbreaker may be well intentioned, but the result is that society is su...
In Mapp v. Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the due process protections of the exclusionary rul...
Reports on Louis Stokes argument that upholding Terry\u27s frisking by Detective Martin McFadden wou...
Cleveland Police Chief Michael J. Blackwell says police won\u27t abuse new stop-and-frisk authority ...
Reports how the Court is hearing Terry v. Ohio along with 3 others cases with stop-and-frisk issues....
In State v. Williams the Washington Supreme Court attempted to set forth specific criteria for deter...
The Court began its opinion in Winston by putting to one side the procedural protections of the war...
Regulation of Terry stops of pedestrians by police requires articulation of the reasonable and indiv...
Back in 1968, Justice William O. Douglas warned in a dissenting opinion in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1...
Police officers sometimes need flexibility to respond appropriately to a variety of factual situatio...
The plethora of law review articles and cases on search and seizure demonstrates the confusion and f...
The killing of George Floyd, along with other high profile cases of police officers using fatal forc...
Requiring that officers have suspicion of specific crimes before they seize people during stops or a...
The Fourth Amendment to the Federal Constitution protects individuals against unreasonable searches ...
In Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court granted law enforcement broad power to perform a limited stop an...
Removing laws to pursue the lawbreaker may be well intentioned, but the result is that society is su...
In Mapp v. Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the due process protections of the exclusionary rul...
Reports on Louis Stokes argument that upholding Terry\u27s frisking by Detective Martin McFadden wou...
Cleveland Police Chief Michael J. Blackwell says police won\u27t abuse new stop-and-frisk authority ...
Reports how the Court is hearing Terry v. Ohio along with 3 others cases with stop-and-frisk issues....
In State v. Williams the Washington Supreme Court attempted to set forth specific criteria for deter...
The Court began its opinion in Winston by putting to one side the procedural protections of the war...
Regulation of Terry stops of pedestrians by police requires articulation of the reasonable and indiv...