Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
What the Mayor cited was incorrect. It is not constitutional. If you read what the Ohio Supreme court said you will understand it to not allow stop and frisk, but for suspension. Seeing someone walking and arbitrarily stopping and frisking is not constitutional. "The city maintains stop and frisk is legal, as per the 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Terry v. Ohio, which determined that police may conduct such actions as long as an officer has a "reasonable suspicion" that the target may have committed a crime or be about to commit one." Read below.
Thus, it is argued, the police should be allowed to "stop" a person and detain him briefly for questioning upon suspicion that he may be connected with criminal activity. Upon suspicion that the person may be armed, the police should have the power to "frisk" him for weapons. If the "stop" and the "frisk" give rise to probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime, then the police should be empowered to make a formal "arrest," and a full incident "search" of the person.
see United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 586-587 (1948). The scope of the search must be "strictly tied to and justified by" the circumstances which rendered its initiation permissible. Aug 17, 2013