Criminal Procedure Arizona v. Johnson PDF

Preview

Summary

Criminal Procedure 2020 Lecture Notes: Case Brief on AZ v Johnson...

Description

Criminal Procedure Chapter 23 Case Brief

Arizona v. Johnson United States Supreme Court 555 U.S. 323 (2009) Facts: Police officers stopped a car because its registration had been suspended. One of the officers asked Johnson (defendant), one of the passengers, to get out of the car. The officer feared that Johnson might have a gun, so she patted him down, and the frisk revealed a gun. The state court held that because the officer had no suspicion that Johnson was involved in criminal activity, the frisk was not constitutional. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. Issue: May an officer frisk a passenger during a traffic stop based on mere suspicion that the person subjected to the frisk is armed and dangerous? Rule: To justify a pat down of a driver or passenger during a lawful traffic stop, the police must have reasonable suspicion that the person subjected to the frisk is armed and dangerous. Analysis & Holding: Yes. To justify a pat down of a driver or passenger during a lawful traffic stop, the police must have reasonable suspicion that the person subjected to the frisk is armed and dangerous. Importantly, the officer’s inquiries into matters unrelated to the justification for the traffic stop do not necessarily terminate the lawful seizure. In this case, the pat down of Johnson was constitutional. The officers did not give any indication to Johnson that he was free to go or that the stop had ended, and one of the officers had reasonable suspicion that Johnson had a gun. This reasonable suspicion during the lawful stop makes the pat down constitutional. The state court is reversed....