Arizona v. Johnson

E522188

Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.

All labels observed (1)

Label Occurrences
Arizona v. Johnson canonical 1

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (44)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
appliesPrecedent Maryland v. Wilson NERFINISHED
Pennsylvania v. Mimms NERFINISHED
Terry v. Ohio NERFINISHED
clarifies Authority to frisk vehicle passengers
Scope of Terry frisk during traffic stops
hasArguedDate 2008-12-09
hasCitation 129 S. Ct. 781
172 L. Ed. 2d 694
555 U.S. 323
hasCountry United States of America
surface form: United States
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED
hasDecisionDate 2009-01-26
hasDecisionType unanimous decision
hasDocketNumber 07-1122
hasFullCaseName Arizona v. Johnson NERFINISHED
hasHolding A lawful traffic stop seizes every occupant of the vehicle for Fourth Amendment purposes.
An officer may conduct a patdown search of a passenger upon reasonable suspicion that the passenger is armed and dangerous, even if there is no suspicion of criminal activity by that passenger beyond the traffic violation.
Police may frisk a passenger during a lawful traffic stop if they reasonably suspect the person is armed and dangerous.
hasJurisdiction United States federal law
hasLegalIssue Fourth Amendment NERFINISHED
Terry stop and frisk
Traffic stop
hasLowerCourt Arizona Court of Appeals NERFINISHED
hasOpinionAuthor Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED
hasOpinionType majority opinion
hasPetitioner State of Arizona NERFINISHED
hasProceduralPosture Review of decision of the Arizona Court of Appeals
hasRespondent Lemon Johnson NERFINISHED
hasResult Judgment of the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed
hasStandard reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous
hasState Arizona NERFINISHED
hasSubjectMatter constitutional law
criminal law enforcement
hasTimePeriod 2000s
hasVote 9-0
holdsThat The encounter remains a traffic stop even when officers ask questions unrelated to the reason for the stop, so long as the inquiries do not measurably extend the duration of the stop.
interprets Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED
isCitedFor authority to frisk passengers during traffic stops
definition of seizure of vehicle occupants
isPartOf United States Supreme Court jurisprudence on the Fourth Amendment
relatesTo criminal procedure
police officer safety
search and seizure law

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Terry v. Ohio subsequentCitationBy Arizona v. Johnson