Terry v. Ohio
E123410
Terry v. Ohio is a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the legality of police "stop and frisk" searches based on reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Terry v. Ohio canonical | 5 |
| Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1076327 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Terry v. Ohio Context triple: [Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, landmarkCase, Terry v. Ohio]
-
A.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
-
B.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
C.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
D.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
-
E.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Terry v. Ohio Target entity description: Terry v. Ohio is a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the legality of police "stop and frisk" searches based on reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause.
-
A.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
-
B.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
C.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
D.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
-
E.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Fourth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal procedure ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1967-12-12 ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtDecision | Earl Warren ⓘ |
| citation | 392 U.S. 1 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted | Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1968-06-10 ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
William O. Douglas
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William O. Douglas
|
| docketNumber | 67 ⓘ |
| finding |
The frisk was limited in scope to a search for weapons for officer safety.
ⓘ
The officer’s observations provided reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. ⓘ |
| fullName |
Terry v. Ohio
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
|
| holding |
A brief investigatory stop is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment but may be reasonable without probable cause if supported by specific and articulable facts.
ⓘ
Police may stop a person and conduct a limited frisk for weapons based on reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and presently dangerous. ⓘ |
| impact |
Became a foundational precedent for stop-and-frisk practices in the United States.
ⓘ
Created the Terry stop doctrine in U.S. policing. ⓘ Lowered the threshold from probable cause to reasonable suspicion for certain police encounters. ⓘ |
| issue | Whether a stop and frisk based on reasonable suspicion violates the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| languageOfOpinion | English ⓘ |
| legalDoctrineEstablished | stop and frisk ⓘ |
| legalStandardEstablished | reasonable suspicion ⓘ |
| locationOfIncident |
Cleveland
ⓘ
surface form:
Cleveland, Ohio
|
| majorityOpinionBy |
Earl Warren
ⓘ
surface form:
Chief Justice Earl Warren
|
| originatingStateCase | Ohio ⓘ |
| petitioner | John W. Terry ⓘ |
| policeActionAtIssue |
brief investigatory stop
ⓘ
frisk of outer clothing ⓘ |
| precedentialStatus | binding precedent in U.S. federal and state courts ⓘ |
| reasoningKeyConcept | balancing test between public interest and individual rights ⓘ |
| reasoningKeyPhrase | specific and articulable facts ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
exclusionary rule
ⓘ
investigatory detention ⓘ stop and identify statutes ⓘ |
| respondent |
Ohio
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Ohio
|
| searchType |
pat-down for weapons
ⓘ
stop and frisk ⓘ |
| standardOfProofCompared | probable cause ⓘ |
| standardOfProofUsed | reasonable suspicion ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationBy |
Arizona v. Johnson
ⓘ
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada ⓘ Illinois v. Wardlow ⓘ Minnesota v. Dickerson ⓘ United States v. Sokolow ⓘ |
| timePeriod | Warren Court era ⓘ |
| vote | 8–1 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Terry v. Ohio Description of subject: Terry v. Ohio is a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the legality of police "stop and frisk" searches based on reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause.
Referenced by (6)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)