Terry v. Ohio [1968]

392 U.S. 1 (1968) · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

criminal law and procedurecriminal law and procedureconstitutional law

Issue

Can police conduct a brief stop and frisk on less than probable cause?

Held

Yes, if supported by reasonable suspicion and limited to officer safety.

Exam use

Review the ratio and reasoning before applying this case in problem questions.

Summary

Foundational stop-and-frisk doctrine.

Facts

An officer stopped and frisked men he suspected were preparing a robbery.

Issue

Can police conduct a brief stop and frisk on less than probable cause?

Held

Yes, if supported by reasonable suspicion and limited to officer safety.

Ratio Decidendi

A Terry stop requires reasonable suspicion; a frisk requires reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous.

Reasoning

The intrusion was limited and balanced against legitimate safety and crime-prevention interests.

Essay-Ready Explanation Generator

Version 1 of 4

Reference to Terry v. Ohio (392 U.S. 1 (1968)) strengthens a criminal law and procedure answer because the case reflects the principle that A Terry stop requires reasonable suspicion; a frisk requires reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Can police conduct a brief stop and frisk on less than probable cause? The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.

Significance

Foundational stop-and-frisk doctrine.

Related Cases

No related cases listed.

Exam Tips

Review the ratio and reasoning before applying this case in problem questions.

Revision Checklist

  • Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
  • State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
  • Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
  • Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.

Sources