Code of Criminal Procedure · Terry v. Ohio
Terry v. Ohio
Terry v. Ohio is covered under Terry v. Ohio and tested on the TCOLE peace officer licensing exam. Cadets typically encounter this topic under "Search & Seizure" on practice exams.
To prove this offense, the State must establish each of the following elements: Specific, articulable facts; Plus rational inferences; Warranting the suspicion that criminal activity is afoot; Lower than probable cause; higher than a hunch.
Elements you must prove
- Specific, articulable facts
- Plus rational inferences
- Warranting the suspicion that criminal activity is afoot
- Lower than probable cause; higher than a hunch
Practice 2 questions on this topic
Time yourself, score your run, review missed questions with statute references — Free Practice Pass cadets get limited access.
Worked examples
Worked example 1
A Terry stop (investigative detention) is justified by:
- Probable cause
- Reasonable suspicion — specific articulable facts that, taken together with rational inferences, warrant the intrusion Correct
- Mere hunch
- Random selection
Why: An investigative detention requires reasonable suspicion: specific, articulable facts that, with rational inferences, warrant the suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.
Statute: Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Worked example 2
Under Terry, an officer may frisk a lawfully detained person for weapons when the officer has reasonable suspicion that:
- Anything illegal might be found
- The person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or others Correct
- The person has committed any crime
- The person is a non-resident
Why: A frisk (limited pat-down for weapons) is permitted only on reasonable suspicion that the detained person is armed and dangerous. The frisk is limited to outer clothing and to a search for weapons. The 'plain feel' doctrine permits seizure if the criminal nature of an item is immediately apparent during the lawful frisk.
Statute: Terry v. Ohio; Adams v. Williams