To make a proper stop and frisk under Terry v. Ohio, a police officer may obtain the necessary information fro

Question

which one of theses is the answer?

a. a complaining citizen

b. personal observation

c. either a complaining citizen or personal observation or a combination of both

d. an arrest warrant

e. a hunch that a specific person may be planning some criminal activity

i be leave that it is B but unsure?

Answer 1

Actually, it is C. If a citizen makes a complaint and tells an officer that the subject was seen with a weapon, or something that looks like one, the officer can stop and frisk for his/her safety, as well as for the public. That, and a signed complaint gives the officer reason to contact.

Personal observation by the officer or another officer is also grounds for "stop and frisk". Hunch is enough to stop and ID, but not to frisk unless the subject is acting in such a manner that the officer can justify the reasons for the search, and this would fall back to "personal observations at time of contact".

Answer 2

E. terry was frisked because he was pacing in front of a jewelry stor wearing a long coat. the officer sensed his suspicious nature, frisked him, and found weapons.  now police are allowed to frisk ALL subjects they encounter for weapons ONLY (not contraband such as drugs) to ensure their own and public safety.

Answer 3

The answer would be

B

This is the case of an officer that was observing 2 black males scanning a store and another black male at the corner and just patted them down.

That is also known a a Terry Frisk but the answer is b. for the terry v ohio case. Did a 8 page paper on it

Answer 4

Ah, the Terry Stop.  Answer is B.  An officer may perform a quick search of a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed.  This reasonable suspicion must be based on specific and articulable facts and not merely a HUNCH.

Answer 5

The correct answer is C. You can act on a citizen complaint. Like I saw hiw with a gun or he just stabbed someone. As long as you have a reasonable suspision that the person has something or did something or about to do something you can check the outermost clothing,

These were published as accepted reason the courts approved in New York.

Simple refusal to answer questions.

Simple refusal to identify oneself.

Flight alone...or in conjunction with equivocal circumstances that might justify a police request for information is insufficient to justify a pursuit of an individual because an individual has a right “to be let alone and refuse to respond to police inquiry.” However, if there is reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot, flight, and other surrounding circumstances, may form the basis to pursue the individual.

Nervous reaction alone.

“The nature and location of the area where a suspect is detained may be one of the factors considered in determining whether, in a given case, the police acted reasonably.” However, “location alone cannot serve as the justification for untoward or excessive police behavior against those of our citizens who happen to live, work or travel in “high crime areas.”

A suspect’s presence in a “drug-prone” location, alone.

General descriptions of suspects — for example, radio description of two male blacks wearing jeans and sneakers — alone.

A person cannot be stopped or stopped and frisked solely because he or she is in the company of an individual whom the police reasonably suspect.

A visible bulge inside a person’s pocket, without more, is insufficient to warrant a stop. However, a bulge at the waistband and a movement toward the waistband has been found to be sufficient to warrant a stop-and-frisk.

A suspect’s association with known drug dealers, without more, is insufficient.

Reasonable suspicion cannot be established solely based on an individual’s conversation with two alleged drug dealers.

Answer 6

(C)

Answer 7

Possibly could be B.. I duuno

Answer 8

The correct answer is B.

The second part of C - "combination of both" is also correct.

The first part of C - "complaining citizen" is not sufficient.

The officer may not act on any info from a citizen until he verifies it with his own observations - which brings us back to B.

Answer 9

c