Hi guys, Welcome to the Advanced Video Search Engine, and you are watching Terry v. Ohio Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained. That video is uploaded by Quimbee at 2020-09-30T15:25:00-07:00. We are promoting this video only for entertainment and educational purpose only. So, I hope you like & enjoy it. [cAfn20FMheA]
| Name | Terry v. Ohio Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained |
| Video Uploader | Video From Quimbee |
| Upload Date | This Video Uploaded At 30-09-2020 22:25:00 |
| Video Discription | Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview Terry v. Ohio | 392 U.S. 1 (1968) Imagine a police officer reasonably suspects that a person is about to commit a crime and is armed with a weapon. But it’s mostly a hunch, and the officer lacks probable cause to arrest or search the person for evidence. Does the Fourth Amendment nevertheless permit the officer to stop and frisk the person? The United States Supreme Court addressed this question in Terry versus Ohio. One afternoon in 1963 in Cleveland, Officer Martin McFadden, who had patrolled the same beat for thirty years, observed John Terry and Richard Chilton repeatedly peer into a store window and walk away, only to return shortly thereafter and peer into it again. The two men did so around six times each. Eventually, the men walked away from the store. McFadden, who’d never before seen the men, believed that they were casing the store for a robbery. He approached them and inquired about their actions. The men mumbled something unintelligible in response. Officer McFadden then grabbed Terry, spun him around, and patted down his outer clothing. During the pat-down, McFadden felt what was clearly a pistol inside Terry’s coat pocket. McFadden removed the pistol and then patted down Chilton. McFadden found a second pistol during the frisk of Chilton. Eventually, a prosecutor charged Terry and Chilton with carrying concealed weapons. In a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence of the pistols, Terry and Chilton contended that McFadden’s stop and frisk violated the Fourth Amendment. The trial court denied the motion, holding that McFadden’s search was permissible under the Fourth Amendment. Following a bench trial, both men were convicted. On appeal, the Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and the Ohio Supreme Court then dismissed a further appeal as lacking a substantial constitutional question. Terry and Chilton filed a joint cert petition. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/terry-v-ohio The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/terry-v-ohio Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/ Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries cAfn20FMheA |
| Category | Education |
| Tags | Terry v. Ohio | briefs | quimbee | law case | case brief example | brief case | case brief | press brief | case summaries | legal brief | how to brief a case | case brief template | legal brief case | how to write a case brief | legal brief example | sample case brief | case brief format | example of a brief | law briefs | legal brief definition | what is a brief in law | what is a case brief | court brief | brief definition law | legal brief template | facts of the case | case summary example |
