Question

"Stop and Frisk" Please respond to the following:

• Based on the information found in this chapter related to stop-and-frisk, examine two actions as they relate to the Fourth Amendment and the arrest process. In your opinion, which should have the greatest constitutional protection, stop or frisk? Why? Then, use the Internet to research, identify, and examine one stop-and-frisk case from within the last three years. Then share your opinion on the use of stop and frisk.

Answer 1

Two actions as they relate to the Fourth Amendment and the arrest process are circumstances and initial police action. For a stop to be valid, the officer must first observe actions by the suspect which would lead to the reasonable conclusion that the suspect was either just involved or soon to be involved in a criminal act or that the suspect is possibly armed and dangerous. During the initial police action, the officer can not be vague in his intent. Two actions the officer must immediately take during a stop are to identify themselves as a police officer, followed by reasonable inquiries.

In my opinion, I believe that frisk should have the greatest constitutional protection. I do not feel that it is wrong to stop someone and ask reasonable questions, issues with invasion of privacy begin during an unnecessary frisk, or the officer goes farther than mere frisk protocol. Citizens have the right to be secure in their persons, but there is a thin line that must not be crossed between the protection of the public and also allowing for the privacy of an individual. Although some may argue that if there is nothing to hide, why is it such a problem to answer questions or have items searched by law enforcement? On the other side of the argument, although one is following the law that does not mean they want to be inconvenienced by a search every time they encounter an officer.

The Arkansas Supreme Court in Shay v. State, 562 S.W.3d 832 (Ark.2018) ruled that the search of a wallet during the frisk of a suspect was beyond the scope of a lawful “Terry” frisk. During the incident Corporal Kenneth Kennedy of the Clarksville Arkansas Police Department approached a parked car in Cline Park at 4.59 a.m. This park is known to be in a higher crime area and was closed to the public at the time of the discovery. Approaching the vehicle, Corporal Kennedy observed the nervousness of Mo Shay and his passenger during questioning, which initiated the frisk of the suspects. During the frisk Corporal Kennedy, corroborated by the audio recording of the officer's camera, found Shay’s wallet and began to search it for ID in which he found a small brown bag that contained methamphetamine initiating an arrest. The court agreed that Corporal Kennedy had reasonable suspicion to frisk Shay fore his answers did not dispel Kennedy’s suspicion of criminal activities, but that his admission of knowing that the wallet was not a weapon he did not have probable cause to search the wallet without consent. The court then reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

I believe that stop and frisk is an integral part of police work, but there is a line that needs not to be crossed in regards to frisk procedures. Stop-and-frisk procedures have protected many law enforcement officers and citizens throughout its use, but as we have seen, it has also been the subject of many court cases. I feel that adequate training in regards to these procedures will help to curb the arguments pertaining to the unconstitutionality of this practice.