What does Terry v Ohio (1962) address regarding police practices?

Terry v. Ohio (1968) is a landmark Supreme Court case that established the constitutionality of "stop and frisk" procedures conducted by police officers. In this case, the Court recognized that law enforcement officers do not always need a warrant or probable cause to conduct a brief stop and pat-down search of an individual. The ruling came in response to concerns for officer safety; the Court found that if an officer has a reasonable suspicion that a person is involved in criminal activity and may be armed and dangerous, they are permitted to stop the individual and conduct a limited search for weapons.

This decision is significant because it balances the need for police to ensure their safety while also protecting the constitutional rights of individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. Law enforcement must still articulate specific facts that led them to suspect a person is involved in criminal activity, distinguishing these lawful stops from arbitrary detentions. This ruling plays a crucial role in contemporary policing practices, helping officers to make quick decisions in potentially hazardous situations while still adhering to constitutional standards.

The other options do not accurately reflect the ruling in Terry v. Ohio. The case does not endorse the right to search anyone at will, nor does it require a signed warrant before detaining someone, nor does it prohibit searches without probable