Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Fourth Amendment

University of Baltimore Law

University of Baltimore Law Forum

Journal

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Recent Development: Sellman V. State: Absent Additional Circumstances, Consent To A Vehicle Search In A High Crime Area Does Not Create Reasonable Suspicion To Justify A Terry Frisk Of A Passenger Who Displays Nervous Behavior; Theft From A Vehicle Does Not Automatically Infer That An Individual Is Armed, Ashley N. Simmons Jan 2017

Recent Development: Sellman V. State: Absent Additional Circumstances, Consent To A Vehicle Search In A High Crime Area Does Not Create Reasonable Suspicion To Justify A Terry Frisk Of A Passenger Who Displays Nervous Behavior; Theft From A Vehicle Does Not Automatically Infer That An Individual Is Armed, Ashley N. Simmons

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that, under the totality of the circumstances, a law enforcement officer did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct a Terry frisk of a passenger during a traffic stop. Sellman v. State, 449 Md. 526, 544, 144 A.3d 771, 782 (2016). The court ruled that a police department policy authorizing officers to conduct Terry frisks based on consent to search a vehicle violates the Fourth Amendment. Id. at 557, 144 A.3d at 790. The court further held that the crime of theft from vehicles does not imply the possession of a deadly weapon. Id. …


Recent Development: Varriale V. State: The State May Store And Use A Voluntarily Provided Dna Sample And Resultant Profile For Any Future Criminal Investigations, Unless The Suspect Provides An Express Limitation, C. Harris Schlecker Jan 2016

Recent Development: Varriale V. State: The State May Store And Use A Voluntarily Provided Dna Sample And Resultant Profile For Any Future Criminal Investigations, Unless The Suspect Provides An Express Limitation, C. Harris Schlecker

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that when a suspect does not expressly limit consent to DNA testing, the Fourth Amendment does not prevent the State from storing and using his voluntarily provided DNA in later, unrelated criminal investigations.