search and seizure requires probable cause. which means the cop will have had to know that you committed a crime and a stop and frisk only requires reasonable suspicion but the cop can not actually search you they can only pat down the outside of your clothing to make sure you don't have any weapons. In that case they should only be ""Frisking"" you for their own safety to make sure you do not have a weapon that can be used against them. If do they happen to feel a pound of weed on you during a stop and frisk then they have Probable cause to search and seize you and the evidence. :)
Yes, it certainly does. A frisk is done when an officer has a reasonable suspicion that you've committed a crime. A search is done when a police officer has probable cause that you committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime. Read more about it here: http://www.californiacleanrecord.com/whats-the-difference-between-a-frisk-and-a-search/ This article was written by an attorney in San Francisco, CA and it really helps.
Yes.
Frisk search, wall search, female search.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1 (1968)The Fourth Amendment, specifically the Search and Seizure Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. Terry's attorney attempted to have the "stop and frisk" technique labeled an unreasonable search and seizure in order to have any evidence discovered during the search suppressed under the Exclusionary Rule.The case also raised the question of whether the petitioner's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizure was made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.The US Supreme Court found the "stop and frisk" technique constitutional when a "reasonably prudent officer" has concerns for his or others' safety. As a result, evidence produced from the search may be used against the defendant in court.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1 (1968)The Fourth Amendment, specifically the Search and Seizure Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. Terry's attorney attempted to have the "stop and frisk" technique labeled an unreasonable search and seizure in order to have any evidence discovered during the search suppressed under the Exclusionary Rule.The case also raised the question of whether the petitioner's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizure was made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.The US Supreme Court found the "stop and frisk" technique constitutional when a "reasonably prudent officer" has concerns for his or others' safety. As a result, evidence produced from the search may be used against the defendant in court.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
No. The terms are synonymous. The "stop and frisk" technique was challenged as a violation of Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure when Terry attempted to have the gun recovered during a pat down excluded from evidence in court.The term "Terry Stop" derives from the US Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, (1968) that upheld the investigative technique as constitutional under circumstances where a "reasonably prudent officer" has a legitimate concern for his or others' safety. The Court refused to apply the exclusionary rule to stop and frisk, allowing anything recovered during a "legitimate and restrained" pat down to be used against the defendant in court.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Your question lacks specificity. Place your question into context. There are more than four types of searches.
A "stop and frisk search," where police search you for their protection or incidental to an arrest; or when contraband is in plain view of the officer.
FRISK IS AN ABILITY NOT A MOVE! But yes, Stantler can have the Frisk ability.
there is no frisk ability.
FRISK IS AN ABILITY NOT A MOVE! But yes, Banette can have the ability Frisk alternatively to Insomnia.
Police officers pat downAdded; It is confined to the outer clothing of the individual and the officer may not go into your pockets unless the frisk detects an object which the officer believes could be a weapon or contraband (i.e.; it is short of a full-fledged "search.").