§ 17.05 Grounds for "Terry Stops"

• Jurisdiction: North Carolina

§ 17.05 Grounds for "Terry Stops"¹⁰¹

[A] Crime Prevention versus Crime Detection

Terry involved the brief seizure and limited search of a person suspected of imminent criminal activity. The brief seizure was reasonable in view of the government's interest in crime prevention. The Supreme Court unanimously held in United State v. Hensley,¹⁰² however, that a Terry-level seizure may also be reasonable in order to investigate a crime that has already occurred. However, a seizure that is reasonable in the crime-prevention context will not necessarily be permissible in the crime-investigation setting.¹⁰³

As the Court explained in Hensley, the factors that go into the Terry "reasonableness" balancing inquiry are not identical in the two contexts. The exigent circumstances that justify a brief detention when an officer reasonably suspects that serious crime is afoot may be missing in the crime-detection framework. Furthermore, in crime-detection cases, officers often can choose a time and place for the stop that is more convenient to the suspect than is possible when crime is afoot.

[B] Nature of the Offense

Most Terry-type seizures involve the detention of persons suspected of involvement in violent crimes. The principles of Terry extend, however, beyond that narrow focus. For example, the police may seize a person for investigation of drug trafficking "or of any other serious crime."¹⁰⁴ And the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that:

in a traffic-stop setting, the first Terry condition — a lawful investigatory stop — is met whenever it is lawful for police to detain an automobile and its occupants pending inquiry into a vehicular violation. The police need not have, in addition, cause to believe any occupant of the vehicle is involved in criminal activity.¹⁰⁵

[C] Fingerprinting

The Supreme Court considers fingerprinting a less serious intrusion on a person's security than most other police practices. First, fingerprinting (unlike interrogations and some searches) does not probe a person's private life and thoughts. Second, the process is more reliable than lineups and confessions, and "is not subject to such abuses as the improper [suggestive] line-up and the 'third degree' [interrogation]."¹⁰⁶Third, fingerprinting can often be conducted at a time convenient to the suspect and need not be repeated.

In light of these differences, the transportation of a suspect to the police station for fingerprinting, if she is detained there only briefly, is permissible on the...