Document: 508 U.S. 366 113 S.Ct. 2130 124 L.Ed.2d 334 MINNESOTA, Petitioner,v.Timothy DICKERSON. No. 91-2019. Argued March 3, 1993. Decided June 7, Syllabus * Based upon respondent's seemingly evasive actions when approached by police officers and the fact that he had just left a building known for cocaine traffic, decided to investigate further ordered respondent submit patdown search. The search revealed no weapons, but officer conducting it testified felt small lump in jacket pocket, believed be of crack examining with his fingers, then reached into pocket retrieved bag cocaine. state trial court denied motion suppress cocaine, was found guilty possession controlled substance. Minnesota Court Appeals reversed. In affirming, State Supreme held both stop frisk were valid under Terry v. Ohio, 392 1, 88 1868, 20 889, seizure unconstitutional. Refusing enlarge "plain view" exception Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, appeared adopt categorical rule barring any contraband detected an through sense touch during noted that, even if recognized such feel" exception, this case would not qualify because went far beyond what is permissible Terry. Held: 1. may seize nonthreatening protective sort permitted Terry, so long as stays within bounds marked Pp. ____. (a) permits brief person whose suspicious conduct leads conclude light experience criminal activity afoot, weapons justified believing armed presently dangerous. This search—permitted without on basis reasonable suspicion less than probable cause—is meant discover evidence crime, must strictly limited which necessary discovery might used harm or others. If goes determine suspect armed, longer its fruits will suppressed. Sibron New York, 40, 65-66, 1889, 1904, 917. (b) Michigan Long, 463 1032, 1050, 103 3469, 3481, 77 1201 other lawful reference Court's cases "plain-view" doctrine. That doctrine object they are lawfully position view it, incriminating character immediately apparent, have right access it—has obvious application analogy discovers otherwise Thus, pats down suspect's outer clothing feels contour mass makes identity there has been invasion privacy already authorized officer's weapons. Cf., e.g., Illinois Andreas, 765, 771, 3319, 3324, 1003. contraband, warrantless realization resort neutral magistrate circumstances impracticable do little promote objectives. Arizona Hicks, 480 321, 326-327, 107 1149, 1153-1154, 94 347. 2. Application foregoing principles facts demonstrates who conducted acting at time gained cause believe contraband. Under interpretation record, never thought weapon, did recognize Rather, determined only after squeezed, slid, manipulated pocket's contents. While entitled him place hands feel continued exploration concluded contained weapon unrelated sole justification Because constitutionally invalid, followed likewise 481 N.W.2d 840, (Minn.1992) affirmed. WHITE, J., delivered opinion unanimous respect Parts I II, III IV, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined. filed concurring opinion. REHNQUIST, C.J., part dissenting part, BLACKMUN THOMAS, Michael O. Freeman, Minneapolis, MN, petitioner. Richard H. Seamon, Washington, DC, U.S., amicus curiae special leave Court. Peter W. Gorman, respondent. Justice WHITE 1 case, we consider whether Amendment 2 On evening November 9, 1989, two Minneapolis patrolling area city's north side squad car. At about 8:15 p.m., one observed leaving 12-unit apartment Morgan Avenue North. officer, having previously responded complaints drug sales building's hallways executed several warrants premises, considered notorious "crack house." According testimony credited court, began walking toward but, spotting car making eye contact officers, abruptly halted opposite direction. His aroused, watched turned entered alley building. further. 3 pulled their take interest nylon jacket. later testified: 4 "[A]s pat-searched front body, lump, pocket. examined my fingers slid cellophane." Tr. 9 (Feb. 20, 1990). 5 plastic containing fifth gram Respondent arrested charged Hennepin County District 6 Before trial, moved first 889 (1968), stopping engaged activity. frisking ensure carrying weapon. Finally, analogizing doctrine, make plain items, ruled officers' violate Amendment: 7 "To distinction sensory perception uses material An experienced rely smell DWI stops recognizing burning marijuana automobile. sound shotgun being racked clearly support certain reactions officer. touch, grounded training, reliable perceptions drawn from senses. 'Plain feel,' therefore, different equally here." App. Pet. Cert. C-5. 8 suppression failed, proceeded guilty. appeal, agreed investigative belief based specific articulable behavior concluded, however, overstepped allowed seizing doing so, "decline[d] exception" requirement. 469 462, 466 (1991). 10 Like Appeals, expressly refused "to extend touch" grounds "the inherently immediate sight" more intrusive personal core [F]ourth [A]mendment." 845 (1992). thus "[e]ven 'plain feel' qualify" "[t]he pat defendant Terry." Id., 843 844, n. As read ascertained probing investigating certainly knew See id., 844. 11 We granted certiorari, 506 ----, 53, 121 22 (1992), resolve conflict among federal courts over admitted evidence.1 now affirm.2 II A. 12 Amendment, made applicable States way Fourteenth Mapp 367 643, 81 1684, 1081 (1961), guarantees people secure persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches seizures." Time again, seizures " 'conducted outside judicial process, prior approval judge magistrate, per se subject few specifically established well delineated exceptions.' Thompson Louisiana, 17, 19-20, 105 409, 410, 83 246 (1984) (per curiam ) (quoting Katz United States, 389 347, 357, 507, 514, 19 576 (1967) (footnotes omitted)); Mincey Arizona, 437 385, 390, 98 2408, 2412, 57 290 (1978); see also Place, 462 696, 701, 2637, 2641, 110 (1983). One "where observes unusual reasonably afoot" briefly "reasonable inquiries" aimed confirming dispelling suspicions. 30, S.Ct., 1884; Adams Williams, 407 143, 145-146, 92 1921, 1922-1923, 32 612 (1972). 13 "[w]hen individual close range dangerous others," weapon." 24, 1881. "The purpose allow pursue investigation fear violence. . ." Adams, supra, 146, 1923. cause—must "limited others nearby." 26, 1882; 1049, 1052, 16, 3480-3481, 3482, (1983); Ybarra Illinois, 444 85, 93-94, 100 338, 343-344, 62 238 (1979). 917 (1968). 14 These settled 25 years ago when, same day, announced decisions Sibron. question presented today think answer may, B 15 least circumstances, execution example, man driven ditch influence some intoxicant. reenter roadside, spotted knife floorboard. stopped man, subjected search, inspected interior vehicle During passenger compartment, discovered open pouch seized it. upheld validity context roadside encounter, where driver dangerous, driver's compartment 3480-3481. Of course, vehicle, solely danger stored could bystanders, those areas placed hidden." Ibid. held: "If, while legitimate automobile, should, here, cannot required ignore does require circumstances." 3481; accord, Sibron, 69-70, 1905-1906 (WHITE, concurring); 79, 1910 (Harlan, result). 16 Long latter holding our Hensley, 221, 235, 675, 683-684, 604 (1985) (upholding plain-view stop). object, warrant. Horton California, 496 128, 136-137, 2301, 2307-2308, 112 (1990); Texas Brown, 460 730, 739, 1535, 1541-1542, 75 502 (1983) (plurality opinion). If, lack object—i.e., "its [is not] 'immediately apparent,' Horton, 136, 2308—the justify seizure. 347 (1987). 17 rationale vantage point, expectation "search" meaning Amendment—or independent initial intrusion gave point. 1003 740, 1542. presents itself manner deemed often objectives Amendment. 1153; Coolidge Hampshire, 403 443, 467-468, 469-470, 91 2022, 2028-2029, 2040, 29 564 (1971) (opinion Stewart, J.). can said tactile discoveries weapons; practical considerations inhere context.3 rantless seizure." 466, 2038, 18 rejected grounds: first, sight," second, N.W.2d, 845. somewhat view. First, capable revealing nature sufficient reliability very premise all, able detect presence precisely Even true generally sight, suggests unseen Regardless detects sight requirement item before ensures excessively speculative seizures.4 court's second concern—that sight—is inapposite fears occasions privacy. Soldal Cook County, 538, 450 (1992); 141, 2310; Jacobsen, 109, 120, 104 1652, 1660, 80 85 (1984). Accordingly, interests advanced plainly touch. It remains apply these case. challenged finding affirmed dispositive precise findings instead simply feeling "a small, hard wrapped plastic" "formed cocaine." C-2. "no claim suspected weapon," C-5, 464 (the "never weapon"). Court, examination record," own "belies notion 'immediately' "squeezing, sliding manipulating contents defendant's pocket"—a record clear correct "strictly circumscribed" 1882. Where, "an executing seizes item," rightly "has sensitive authorization, furnished exigency, equivalent general rummage will." 748, 1546-1547 (STEVENS, judgment). Here, [under Terry: ] protection 29, 1884. therefore amounted evidentiary authorize, 1882, condemned subsequent cases. 14, 3480-3481; 1904. 21 Once apt. (1987), invalid stolen stereo equipment evidence. Although premises pursuant warrant, obtained moving permit serial numbers. explained, apparent; rather, arose result search—the —that similar. jacket, below apparent him. 140, 2309-2310. IV For reasons, judgment 23 Affirmed. 24 concurring. fundamental principle constitutional adjudication terms Constitution given ascribed them ratification. provides seizures, shall violated" (emphasis added), "is construed adopted," Carroll 267 132, 149, 45 280, 284, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925); California Acevedo, 500 111 982, 114 619 (1991) (SCALIA, provision, words, preserve degree persons inviolability property existed provision adopted—even later, virtuous age should become accustomed considering all sorts "reasonable." 26 My problem present am entirely sure physical "frisk" produced issue here complied standard. decision ours searches, serious attempt compliance traditional standards, according style time, adjudged "reasonable" current estimations. 22-27, 1880-1883. 27 There good evidence, think, "stop" portion "stop-and-frisk" accords common law detain demanding give account themselves. suggested, particular, so-called night-walker statutes, common-law antecedents. Statute Winchester, Edw. I, Stat. 2, ch. (1285); III, (1331); Hawkins, Pleas Crown c. 13, § 6, p. 129 (8th ed. 1824) ("It holden statute affirmance law, every private arrest night-walker, till himself"); E. East, 5, 70, 303 (1803) M. Dalton, Country 104, pp. 352-353 (1727); Costello, Our Police Protectors: History York (1885) 1681 City regulation); Perpetual Laws Massachusetts 1788-1798, 82, 410 (1797 statute). 28 unaware, precedent temporarily detained questioning. Sometimes, temporary detention elevated full custodial cause—as, instance, unable provide accounting himself. "frisk," incident arrest. When, rise level full-blown (and supported needful purpose), appears physically searching suspect. Warner, Uniform Arrest Act, Va.L.Rev. 315, 324 (1942) ("At watchman came suspiciously nightwalker, arrest"); Detention Privileges England, 51 J.Crim.L., C. & P.S. 413, 418 (1960) ("Where offensively arms, tapping pockets, up minds him? English authority. ."). frankly doubt, moreover, fiercely proud men adopted themselves subjected, mere indignity—which described follows manual: 30 "Check subject's neck collar. A check arm. Next upper back. lower back checked. 31 "A man's chest region around stomach. belt, favorite concealment spot, inside thigh crotch searched. legs checked possible last items shoes cuffs subject." J. Moynahan, Searching Procedures (1963) (citations omitted). hand, impermissible 1791, perhaps applying States) adopted. Or since concealed harming interrogator quickly arm's reach common—which alter original But technological changes discussed law. 33 (insofar power concerned) incorrectly decided, might—even bound adhere case—vote exclude incidentally discovered, theory half guarantee better none. vote original-meaning-is-irrelevant, good-policy-is-constitutional-law school jurisprudence represents. policy matter, desirable "frisks" encourage drugs admitting 34 meaning, however. And though favor mode analysis say wrong. Constitutionality neither nor argued. Assuming, lawful, agree course admissible, join entirety. djQ Chief whom THOMAS join, part. 35 Unlike vacate remand proceedings. 36 correctly view, states [v. (1968),] contraband." Ante, point out accepts appellate Minnesota. findings, like imprecise directed employed differs significantly proceedings syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 337, 282, 287, 50 499. Most corollary Coleman, 969 F.2d 126, 132 (CA5 1992); Salazar, 945 47, (CA2 1991), cert. denied, 504 1975, 118 574 Buchannon, 878 1065, 1067 (CA8 1989); 262 U.S.App.D.C. 112, 119-124, 822 1174, 1181-1186 (1987); Norman, 701 295, 297 (CA4), 820, 78 People Chavers, Cal.3d 471-473, 658 P.2d 96, 102-104 Dickerson State, 1993 WL 22025, *2, Del.LEXIS 12, *3-*4 (Jan. 1993); Guy, 172 Wis.2d 86, 101-102, 492 311, 317-318 Some courts, corollary. Diaz, N.Y.2d 106, 595 N.Y.S.2d 940, N.E.2d 298 (1993); Collins, 139 Ariz. 434, 435-438, 679 80, 81-84 (Ct.App.1983); McCarty, Ill.App.3d 421, 422, 296 862, 863 (1973); Rhodes, 788 1380, 1381 (Okla.Crim.App.1990); Broadnax, Wash.2d 289, 296-301, 654 101-103 (1982); cf. Commonwealth Marconi, 408 Pa.Super. 601, 611-615, 597 A.2d 616, 621-623, (1991), appeal 531 Pa. 638, 611 711 reaching merits issue, address contention moot. After charge, sentenced diversionary sentencing 2-year period probation. scheme, conviction and, successful completion probation, charges dismissed. Minn.Stat. 152.18 argues rendered moot dismissal charges. observed, possibility suffering 'collateral legal consequences' sentence served" precludes mootness. Pennsylvania Mimms, 434 108, 330, 332, 54 331 (1977) ); Evitts Lucey, 387, 391, 4, 830, 833, 821 (1985); 53-58, 1897-1900, proceeding culminated "shall purposes disqualifications disabilities imposed crime purpose." provides, nonpublic dismissed retained department public safety use determining proceedings" Construing contemplates [a] 'future difficulties law.' Goodrich, 256 506, 512 (1977). Moreover, Eighth Circuit disposition included calculating history category event conviction. Frank, 932 700, reinstatement carry collateral consequences live controversy remains. "[T]he each [case have] inadvertently across piece accused. serves supplement war- note (1979), contemplate obtain justifying tavern patrons searches. patting petitioner Ybarra, "officer 'a cigarette pack objects it,' heroin inside. 88-89, 340-342. argued frisk. 92, 342-343. argument dangerous," 92-93, 343. added, "[s]ince Amendments, need decide Ybarra's it' yielded illegal substance." 93, 343, 5. suggest, indeed seems inconsistent with, existence bar manually

Category: 0