What's the case that deals with stop and frisk?

• A. Katz v. United States
• B. Terry v. Ohio
• C. Marbury v. Madison
• D. Gideon v. Wainwright

Answer: (B)

Stop-and-frisk is a policing rule that allows a brief detention with a quick pat-down if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person is involved in criminal activity and may be armed. The case that established and clarified this authority is Terry v. Ohio (1968). In Terry, the police observed individuals acting suspiciously, stopped them, and conducted a pat-down for weapons. The Court ruled that because the officer had articulable, reasonable suspicion and the frisk was limited to protecting the officer from harm, the stop and pat-down were permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The frisk must be narrowly focused on checking for weapons; it cannot become a full search for evidence without probable cause. If no weapons are found and there’s no other probable cause, the detention ends.

The other listed cases deal with different constitutional issues: Katz v. United States centers on privacy and the need for warrants for wiretaps; Marbury v. Madison established judicial review; Gideon v. Wainwright guarantees counsel for defendants who cannot afford an attorney.