Stops and protective frisks

Terry v. Ohio

392 U.S. 1 (1968)

Decision date

June 10, 1968

Record type

U.S. Reports opinion

Source checked

September 4, 2026

InmateLink explanation

What this case helps you understand

Terry addresses when an officer may briefly stop a person and, when there is a separate reason to think the person is armed and dangerous, conduct a limited protective pat-down for weapons.

Limits to check

The stop and any frisk are separate questions; the facts supporting one do not automatically establish the other.
The reasonable-suspicion inquiry is fact-specific, and state constitutions or laws may provide additional protection.

Do not assume

Do not treat Terry as permission for a general evidence search or a stop based only on a hunch.
Do not assume a frisk is automatic whenever a person is stopped.

Questions to check

What specific facts did the officer identify before the stop?
What facts supported a separate belief that the person was armed and dangerous?

Review scope: Primary U.S. Reports record plus the listed official later-treatment anchors; not a citator or exhaustive current-law review. Reviewed September 4, 2026. This is an InmateLink explanation, not copied opinion text or legal advice.

Official primary source

Open the court record

This page identifies the official opinion record and its citation. Read the complete opinion at the official publisher before relying on it.

Open official opinion record

Publisher: U.S. Government Publishing Office · GovInfo
Official citation: 392 U.S. 1 (1968)

Current-treatment boundary

Review is intentionally not exhaustive.

InmateLink has not published a complete current-rule statement for this case. Later opinions, statutes, court rules, and state-law limits may change how a principle applies. Treat the links below as a research trail, not legal advice.

Related official treatment anchors

Back to landmark cases