State v. Rhodes
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
1DissentLumpkin, Judge
I must respectfully dissent to the Court’s decision in this case.
The Court determines the scope of a “Terry pat-down” must be strictly limited to a search for offensive weapons. While I concur with the application of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), as to the basis and purpose of the initial intrusion, I cannot agree with the rationale that a police officer who is legally conducting a Terry search and discovers illegal contraband must disregard that contraband just because it is not a weapon. This interpretation completely disregards the “plain view (touch)”…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Arkansas v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Washington v. ChrismanSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.