Arizona v johnson

Opinion of the Court[ edit ] The police may lawfully stop and detain an automobile and its occupants pending an inquiry into a minor traffic violation, and may conduct a pat down search of an occupant if the police reasonably suspect that the individual is armed and dangerous During a traffic stop, the police may order occupants to exit the vehicle pending completion of the stop.

One officer developed suspicion that Johnson was carrying a gun and ordered him out of the car, where she performed a pat down frisk. A9, but its opinion fails to demonstrate that that is what occurred here. Iowa, U. Machado then directed the driver to get out of the car.

Second, the Arizona Court of Appeals reasoned that permitting a brief pat-down search for weapons in the absence of reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing would be "inconsistent with" the principle that "a person is allowed to disregard or flee from a consensual encoun ter with law enforcement officers.

arizona v johnson cornell

Mimms, U. According to the Court, the officer's inquiries into gang activity matters, unrelated to the justification for the traffic stop, did not convert the encounter into something other than a lawful seizure, since the inquiries did not measurably extend the stop's duration.

Flippin, F. The Court acknowl edged that, once the subject of the warrant has been found, "the search for him [i]s over, and there [i]s no longer that particular justification for entering any rooms that ha[ve] not yet been searched.

Supreme Court Toolbox. The second officer approached the passenger side and spoke with the front-seat passenger, who remained in the vehicle. Williams, U. In response to questions from Officer Trevizo, respondent provided his name and date of birth but said he did not have any identification.

Rated 10/10 based on 48 review
State of Arizona v. Johnson