Rate this paper
  • Currently rating
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.50 / 2
Paper Topic:

Brief and analysis of Terry V. Ohio


University /College

Course and Course Number


Terry v . Ohio Case Study

Case Number : 392 U . S . 1

Name of Appelant : John W . Terry

Respondent : State of Ohio

Origin : Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga County , Ohio

Counsel for Petitioner : Louis Stokes

Address : Cleveland , Ohio

Counsel for Respondent : Reuben M . Payne

Address : Cleveland , Ohio


Table of Contents

Title Page


Legal Brief and Analysis of the Case

Issue of the Case

Facts of the Case p



Works Cited . 2

Legal Brief and Analysis of the Case

The case under study talks about issues on the legality of the search and seizure conducted

by police officers . It also tackle about the consequences of stop and frisk command of police

officers in accordance with the law . The case would tell us a simple yet informative presentation of

a case that involves admissibility of evidences seized through a stop and frisk action of a police


Issue of the Case

The primary issue of the case is whether or not the evidence uncovered by the search and

seizure is admissible against the Petitioner . It calls for an identification by the Court on the

admissibility of the deadly weapon that was seized when the Petitioner was frisked by a police

officer . In line with this , it is necessary to deal with the facts of the case so that a clear

understanding of the case can be obtained

Facts of the Case

According to Findlaw , petitioner Terry together with his companion named Chilton was seen

and observed by McFadden , who was a Cleveland detective at that time , on a street corner while he

is on patrol duty ( Terry v . Ohio , 392 U . S . 1 , 88 S . C . 1968 ' 1 . It was observed by McFadden that

the two persons paused and stare in a store window for about 24 times They were also seen doing a

conference after the said acts . McFadden subsequently seized the pistol of the said persons after

frisking them . It also includes the pistol of a certain person named Katz . Petitioner and Chiton were

charged with carrying concealed weapons after they were brought to the police station . There were

so many arguments presented with respect to the case then



There are three basic arguments regarding this case . This is founded on the fact that the

defense requested to suppress the weapons seized from them . First , the question rests on the

necessity of the police officers to protect themselves when they have a cause to believe that the

suspected persons were actually armed

Actually , it is true that the trial court rejected the view of the prosecution in their theory that

the guns had been seized during a stop and frisk incident to a lawful arrest , yet , the Court denied the

motion submitted by the Petitioners and considered the weapons into evidence on the ground that

the officer had cause to believe that Petitioner and Chilton were acting suspiciously , that their

questioning was with consent and is proper...

Not the Essay You're looking for? Get a custom essay (only for $12.99)