Arizona v. Johnson

Pat-down of passenger following motor vehicle stop was not authorized because officer had no reason to believe defendant was involved in criminal activity, even if officer reasonably believed respondent was armed and dangerous.

Brief filed: 11/02/2008


Arizona v. Johnson

United States Supreme Court; Case No. 07-1122

Prior Decision

Decision below 170 P.3d 667 (Ariz. App. 2007).


Under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), an officer may seize a person for a weapons frisk if the officer reasonably concludes that “criminal activity may be afoot and that the person[] . . . may be armed and presently dangerous”; petitioner and amicus United States seek to replace Terry’s “criminal activity” requirement with a meaningless limitation that the officer has a “lawful right” to be present, a position that cannot be squared with Terry or the Fourth Amendment.

Featured Products


Meir Feder and Donald B. Ayer, Jones Day, New York, NY.