It is true that officer McFadden would have been able to detain Mr. Terry because he had the authority to stop him and demand identification under Terry v. Ohio, 393 U.S. 1 (1968). In this case, stopping Mr. Terry is supported by a reasonable suspicion and therefore the identification demanded by the officer did not by any chance violate the Fifth Amendment. According to the context of Terry stop, identification is not incrimination but it can be incriminating if a person is needed to identify oneself with several criminal activities such as illegal activity or organization participation (Seth, 2009).
Gail Atwater was arrested by a police officer and kept in custody for driving across the street without wearing seatbelts. She was then taken to court where it pleaded her guilty for violating seatbelt law. Afterward, Atwater filed a lawsuit against the officer claiming that her warrantless custodial detain violated the Fourth Amendment’s exclusion against unreasonable seizure. But the court disagreed with her due to a reason for increased litigation (Seth, 2009).Through increased litigation, court claim that it would be impossible to suppress evidence in civil lawsuits for damages and criminal cases, both based on contentions that a forceful need for a custodial detain did not exist.
. Analysis of Violating 4th and 5th Amendments.
ReferenceSeth. (2009, Jan 8). Atwater v. city of lago vista. Retrieved from http://www.4lawnotes.com/criminal-procedure-case-briefs/1145-atwater-v-city-lago-vista.html
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples