Legal Opinion · Dissent

Givens v. State

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided February 20, 2002No. CA CR 01-104Published

1DissentWendell L. Griffen, Judge

I would reverse and remand for a new trial in this case because Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), does not authorize an officer to search a suspect’s pockets to retrieve an item that the officer knows is not a weapon. As noted by the majority, the purpose of a Terry search is to allow an officer to feel the outer portions of a suspect’s clothing to determine if the suspect has any weapons. However, a protective pat-down may not be used as a guise for a general search for evidence of criminal activity. See id. Once the officer determines that a suspect does not have any weapons, the protective…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Minnesota v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Bell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API