Illinois vs Wardlow

1426 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Questions on the fourth amendment

In the case of Illinois vs. Wardlow, many factors contributed to Wardlow’s arrest. Starting with the facts of the case, on September 9, 1995 Sam Wardlow fled after seeing police vehicles covering an area in Chicago where it was known to have high drug trafficking. Two police officers spotted Wardlow, Officers Nolan and Officer Harvey, and once Officer Nolan caught up with Mr. Wardlow, Officer Nolan proceeded to conduct a pat-down search of only the outer layer of clothing, or a “Terry Stop.” Officer Nolan was well aware that in this area, there was almost always a weapon on a suspect that was involved with some type of drug transaction. After conducting the frisk, Officer Nolan squeezed the opaque colored bag that Mr. Wardlow was carrying. He noticed that the object inside of the bag felt like a hard and heavy object which he believed could potentially be a gun. After looking inside the bag, Officer Nolan found a weapon inside, a .38 caliber handgun to be exact. On the spot, Officer Nolan and Officer Harvey arrested Mr. Wardlow. At the time of trial, Mr. Wardlow tried to suppress the handgun as evidence due to the fact that he believed the gun had been seized under an unlawful stop and frisk that violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right of the people against unreasonable searches and seizures by requiring a showing of probable cause in order to obtain a warrant before conducting such searches. “In a trial motion to suppress the gun, Wardlow claimed that in order to stop an individual, short of actually arresting the person, police first had to point to ‘specific reasonable inferences’ why the stop was necessary.”(Oyez, 2000) Recognizing that an investigati... ... middle of paper ... ...uspicion, then will you be able to be one your way. In my opinion, the officers were justified in their actions. Even though Mr. Wardlow was in a high drug trafficking area, that alone was is not enough to presume that Mr. Wardlow was guilty of something. It was only when Mr. Wardlow proceeded to flee from police officers did they find him guilty of something. Works Cited The Oyez Project, Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1999/1999_98_1036) (last visited Tuesday, January 30, 2011). • Jarret, Joseph G. "To Flee or Not to Flee: The Implications of Illinois v. Wardlow on the Practice of Criminal Law in." Florida Bar Journal LXXIV.6 (2000): 96.Web. 30 January 2011. . • United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, (1989)

Show More
Related

  • Ernesto Miranda's Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court ruled that due to the coercive nature of the custodial interrogation by police, no confession could be admissible under the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination Clause and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney unless a suspect has been made aware to his rights and the suspect had then waived them

    Read More

  • A Review of John Pagan’s "Anne Orthwood’s Bastard"

    1304 Words  | 3 Pages

    Pagan writes a captivating story mingled with the challenges of the Eastern Shore legal system. This book gives a complete explanation backed up by research and similar cases as evidence of the ever-changing legal system. It should be a required reading for a history or law student.

    Read More

  • American Civil Liberties: Do Americans Have Enough Protections for Civil Liberties, or Not?

    1449 Words  | 3 Pages

    Wagner, F. D. (2010). McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.. Supreme Court of the United States, 1, 1-214. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

    Read More

  • Griswold vs. Connecticut

    1819 Words  | 4 Pages

    Meyer v. State of Nebraska. 262 U.S. 390, 399, 43 Sct. 625, 626, 67 L.Ed. 1042. (1923)

    Read More

  • Essay On Exceptions To The Fourth Amendment

    1445 Words  | 3 Pages

    The 4th amendment provides citizens protections from unreasonable searches and seizures from law enforcement. Search and seizure cases are governed by the 4th amendment and case law. The United States Supreme Court has crafted exceptions to the 4th amendment where law enforcement would ordinarily need to get a warrant to conduct a search. One of the exceptions to the warrant requirement falls under vehicle stops. Law enforcement can search a vehicle incident to an individual’s arrest if the individual unsecured by the police and is in reaching distance of the passenger compartment. Disjunctive to the first exception a warrantless search can be conducted if there is reasonable belief

    Read More

  • The Stop and Frisk Program within New York City Police Department

    1527 Words  | 4 Pages

    The New York City Police Department enacted a stop and frisk program was enacted to ensure the safety of pedestrians and the safety of the entire city. Stop and frisk is a practice which police officers stop and question hundreds of thousands of pedestrians annually, and frisk them for weapons and other contraband. Those who are found to be carrying any weapons or illegal substances are placed under arrest, taken to the station for booking, and if needed given a summons to appear in front of a judge at a later date. The NYPD’s rules for stop and frisk are based on the United States Supreme Courts decision in Terry v. Ohio. The ruling in Terry v. Ohio held that search and seizure, under the Fourth Amendment, is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest. If the police officer has a “reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime” and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous”, an arrest is justified (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, at 30).

    Read More

  • Bumper V. North Carolina Case Study

    290 Words  | 1 Pages

    In the case Bumper v. North Carolina, Wayne Darnell Bumper was charged and arrested on charges of rape and assault on a child. While the police officers were investigating the case they searched Mrs. Hattie Leath- Bumper’s grandmother‘s home- where he was living at the time. Mrs. Leath consented the police to search her home after the officers said they had a warrant, which they did not have. The officers found a rifle in the kitchen and proceeded to take the gun in as evidence. The rifle was then introduced into Bumper’s trial as evidence. The trial court allowed the gun to be entered in as evidence because Leath gave consent to the officers to search her home.

    Read More

  • The Uncostitutional Restrictive Covenants

    687 Words  | 2 Pages

    SHELLEY v. KRAEMER. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 23 March 2014. .

    Read More

  • Illinois V. Wardlow Essay

    1144 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to data from the American Civil Liberties Union, nearly nine out of every ten people stopped and frisked by the police in the United States are completely innocent. This statistic highlights a clear infringement upon the average citizen’s Fourth Amendment right to no unreasonable searches or seizures, as in the case of Illinois v. Wardlow. In this case, Sam Wardlow, a 44-year old black man, was standing on a sidewalk in West Side Chicago when four police cars converged upon the area. Wardlow, who was not visibly engaged in any illegal or suspicious activity, briefly glanced in the direction of the police before fleeing the scene on foot. As the area was well-known

    Read More

  • Mandatory Sentencing

    1772 Words  | 4 Pages

    Oct 1993. Retrieved November 18, 2010. Vol. 79. 134 pages (Document ID: 0747-0088) Published by American Bar Association

    Read More

  • Ward V Texas Case Study

    1219 Words  | 3 Pages

    Under the California Penal Code, officers are granted permission to search Johnson under the conditions of his probation. While acting upon this, they discovered multiple areas of the house in which controlled substances were hidden. Officers argued that by searching Johnson without a warrant, they prevented the potential destruction of evidence.

    Read More

  • Arizona V. Hicks Summary

    695 Words  | 2 Pages

    Arizona V. Hicks discusses the legal requirements law enforcement needs to meet to justify the search and seizure of a person’s property under the plain view doctrine. The United States Supreme Court delivered their opinion of this case in 1987, the decision is found in the United States reports, beginning on page 321, of volume 480. This basis of this case involves Hicks being indicted for robbery, after police found stolen property in Hick’s home during a non-related search of the apartment. Hicks had accidentally discharged a firearm into the apartment below him, injuring the resident of that apartment. Police responded and searched Hicks apartment to determine the identity of the shooter, recover the weapon, and to locate other victims.

    Read More

  • Essay On Des Moines Independent Community Schools

    579 Words  | 2 Pages

    Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.

    Read More

  • Public Defenders

    2207 Words  | 5 Pages

    Smith, C. E. (2004). Public defenders. In T. Hall, U.S. Legal System (pp. 567-572-). [Ebscohost]. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook

    Read More

  • The Purpose Of Probation And Parole: Pros And Cons

    1238 Words  | 3 Pages

    Constitution prevents the illegal search and seizure without probable cause by law enforcement. Illegally obtained evidence obtained without a warrant or probable cause that is in violation of the Fourth Amendment is excluded from a criminal trial to protect the constitutional rights of the accused, although there are exceptions to this rule. (Cornell University, n.d.). In the case of Pennsylvania Board of Probations v. Scott, respondent Keith Scott was released on parole in September 1993 with the condition of refraining from owning or possessing any firearms. Furthermore, Scott signed the parole agreement consenting to warrantless searches and seizure of himself, property and residence, and that this evidence could be used against him in a parole revocation process. Several months later a warrant was issued claiming Scott was in possession of two handguns. Scott was arrested at the local diner for violating the conditions of his parole. He provided the arresting officers the keys to his home, who entered the home, called his mother, but did begin the not the search begin until his mother came home. Although his mother never consented to the search, she directed the three parole officers to his bedroom where they found nothing relevant. But in an adjacent room, the officers found five firearms, a compound bow and arrows. At the parole violation hearing, Scott’s stepfather claimed the guns were his, and Scott denied knowing his

    Read More

More about Illinois vs Wardlow

Open Document