Terry v. State Of Ohio

392 U.S. 1 (1968)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

McFadden was patrolling in plain clothes when he noticed two men, Chilton and Terry (D), on the corner of Huron Road and Euclid Avenue. McFadden had almost 40 years’ experience as an officer and detective. McFadden observed one man leave the other one and walk southwest on Huron Road, past some stores, pause for a moment and look in a store window, walk on a short distance, turn around and walk back toward the corner, pausing once again to look in the same store window. He rejoined his companion at the corner, and the two conferred briefly. The second man went through the same series of motions. They repeated this ritual five-six times each. A third man approached them and engaged them briefly in conversation. This man then left the two others and walked west on Euclid Avenue. The men resumed their measured pacing, peering, and conferring. After 10 to 12 minutes, the two men walked off together, heading west on Euclid Avenue, following the path taken earlier by the third man. McFadden suspected the two men of 'casing a job, a stick-up,' and that he considered it his duty as a police officer to investigate further. He feared that 'they may have a gun.' McFadden identified himself as a police officer and asked for their names. When the men 'mumbled something' in response to his inquiries, McFadden grabbed D, spun him around so that they were facing the other two, with D between McFadden and the others, and patted down the outside of his clothing. In the left breast pocket of D's overcoat, McFadden felt a pistol. He reached inside the overcoat pocket but was unable to remove the gun. He all three men to enter Zucker's store. As they went in, he removed Terry's overcoat completely, removed a .38-caliber revolver from the pocket and ordered all three men to face the wall with their hands raised. McFadden patted down the outer clothing of Chilton and the third man, Katz. He discovered another revolver in the outer pocket of Chilton's overcoat, but no weapons were found on Katz. McFadden seized Chilton's gun, asked the proprietor of the store to call a police wagon, and took all three men to the station, where Chilton and D were formally charged with carrying concealed weapons. The court denied Ds' motion to suppress the evidence because McFadden, on the basis of his experience, 'had reasonable cause to believe . . . that Ds were conducting themselves suspiciously, and some interrogation should be made of their action.' The court distinguished between an investigatory 'stop' and an arrest, and between a 'frisk' of the outer clothing for weapons and a full-blown search for evidence of crime. The frisk, it held, was essential to the proper performance of the officer's investigatory duties, for without it 'the answer to the police officer may be a bullet, and a loaded pistol discovered during the frisk is admissible.' Ds waived jury trial and pleaded not guilty. The court adjudged them guilty. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court of Ohio dismissed their appeal on the ground that no 'substantial constitutional question' was involved. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.