Officer Safety Trumps Passenger Privacy

• Author: Jill Joline Myers,Darrell L. Ross
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016809342066
• Published date: 01 September 2009
• Date: 01 September 2009
• Subject Matter: Articles

Officer Safety Trumps Passenger

Privacy

Arizona v. Johnson (2009)

Darrell L. Ross

Jill Joline Myers

Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration

In a unanimous 2009 opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Fourth

Amendment authorizes officers to frisk vehicle occupants during a traffic stop if there is

reasonable suspicion to believe that the person is armed and dangerous. Situations

reasonably suggesting the possible presence of weapons by any or all seized persons during

legitimate traffic stops now affirmatively allow an immediate show of authority to neutralize

the potential danger. The decision resulted from the court’s balancing interests under the

Reasonableness Clause of the Fourth Amendment. The nature and extent of the passenger’s

privacy interest in bodily integrity was weighed against the government’s interest in officer

safety. Officer safety trumped passenger privacy. Although there are those who would claim

that the current decision is but another step toward dissipating the Bill of Rights provision as

it relates to matters involving the automobile, the decision is more of an evolution than an

outright abandonment (Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 1971). The Fourth Amendment

mandates that all searches and seizure be reasonable. This article discusses the evolution of

Fourth Amendment law as it relates to frisks involving vehicles and its occupants. This

research traces the evolution of these frisks from its earliest roots under Carroll v. United

States (1925), to its inception under Terry v. Ohio (1968) and finally, to the most recent

decision, Arizona v. Johnson (2009). Society’s privacy interests and police officers’ safety

interests are explored from a practical and workable context such that an appropriate balance

of conduct may result when conducting legitimate traffic encounters.

Keywords: traffic stops; passenger frisk; officer safety; stop and frisk

Introduction

Twice during the current 2008–2009 term, the Supreme Court of the United States revis-

ited the authority of police to conduct searches of persons connected to automobiles. One

case involved the search of a vehicle incident to the arrest of the occupant (Arizona v. Gant,

2009) and the other (Arizona v. Johnson, 2009) discussed herein involved the frisking of a

passenger during a traffic encounter. Both cases invoke significant concern to law enforce-

ment as traffic-related incidents account for most encounters between police and citizens.

Authors’ Note: Please address correspondence to Darrell L. Ross, School of Law Enforcement and Justice

Administration, Western Illinois University Macomb, IL 61455; e-mail: dl-ross@wiu.edu.

Criminal Justice Review

Volume 34 Number 3

September 2009 468-481

#2009 Georgia State University

Research Foundation, Inc.

10.1177/0734016809342066

http://cjr.sagepub.com

hosted at

http://online.sagepub.com

Recent Legal Developments

468