Search results
The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed. The court disagreed that the officers were allowed to seize the cocaine. The court would not adopt the “plain feel” exception. The Minnesota State Supreme Court affirmed and like the Court of Appeals found the seizure to be unconstitutional.
A Supreme Court case that upheld the seizure of cocaine detected by touch during a patdown search under Terry v. Ohio. The Court rejected a categorical rule against "plain-feel" exceptions and applied the plain-view doctrine by analogy.
19 mar 2019 · Minnesota v. Dickerson Case Brief. Statement of the Facts: Respondent Dickerson left a building known for drug trafficking. When he saw police officers, he walked in the other direction. A police officer stopped him and conducted a frisk pursuant to Terry v. Ohio. The officer did not discover any weapons, but felt a lump in Dickerson’s pocket.
3 mar 1993 · On November 9, 1989, while exiting an apartment building with a history of cocaine trafficking, Timothy Dickerson spotted police officers and turned to walk in the opposite direction. In response, the officers commanded Dickerson to stop and proceeded to frisk him.
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court unanimously held that, when a police officer who is conducting a lawful patdown search for weapons feels something that plainly is contraband, the object may be seized even though it is not a weapon. ... Minnesota v. Dickerson: Case ...
Minnesota police spotted Dickerson (defendant) leaving a known crack house. When Dickerson saw the officers, he turned and walked in the other direction. Based on these facts, the officers stopped Dickerson, and one of them performed a patdown search.
Minnesota v. Dickerson Case Brief Summary: Police officer seized cocaine from a suspect's pocket during a search, but the legality of the seizure was later called into question.
