th Amendment issues, we can see if her constitutional rights were violated.First, we will look at Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1, which is a landmark case that sets the standard for many other search and seizure cases. When the officer observed the suspect is this case, he noticed that they were walking in front of a store repeatedly, looking in the windows. The suspects briefly met with a third man, who they later rejoined at another store. After the officer followed them to the other store, he patted down one of the suspects and found a gun. He then place all three under arrest. In this case, the suspects behavior gave the policeman reasonable suspicion. Therefore, he did not violate the Fourth Amendment when he patted them down. From this case, we can see that if the officer has reasonable suspicion they are not breaking any constitutional rights. In Ms. Wines situation, she was simply walking down the street, not staggering.In US v Berry, 670 F.2d 583 (1982), two DEA agents stop two suspects outside the airport in Atlanta, Georgia. One agent thought he recognized Berry, and the suspects stared intently at the agent while they were in the airport. The DEA agents ask about Berrys travel plans once he was outside the airport. When Berry produced identification, it was under his real name, instead of the name on the tickets. One of the agents recognized the name as a man they were supposed to watch. Berry then agreed to go to the DEA office and agreed to a search. Since Berry consented to the searches, his fourth amendment right was not violated and both suspects were convicted. Once again, we see that reasonable suspicion is necessary for a search and seizure.Florida v. Royer, 460 US 491 (1983) is an example of an illegal search and seizure. The suspect never gave the officers consent to a search. The prior court ruling was invalid because the officer had not established probable cause before making the arrest. On the other ...
