Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1995 to Present

Maryland v. Wilson - Significance, A Bright Line Rule?, A Matter Of Safety, Differing Opinions, Impact, Further Readings

vehicle court ohio stop

Petitioner

State of Maryland

Respondent

Jerry Lee Wilson

Petitioner's Claim

Maryland maintained that passengers of a vehicle should be expected to exit a vehicle when requested by a law officer.

Justices for the Court

Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas

Justices Dissenting

Anthony M. Kennedy, John Paul Stevens

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

16 February 1997

Decision

The Supreme Court held that it was consistent with the Fourth Amendment for an officer making a traffic stop to order passengers to get out of the vehicle until the completion of the stop.

Related Cases

  • Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
  • United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975).
  • Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977).
  • Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983).
  • Ohio v. Robinette, 433 U.S. 562 (1996).
  • Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996).

Additional Topics

Maryland v. Wilson - Further Readings

Maryland v. Wilson - Significance

The ruling determined that a police officer has the right to order the passenger of a vehicle out of the car during a traffic stop. Previously, this law had only extended to the driver of the vehicle, due to probable cause when the driver had committed a traffic violation. The determination to extend this law to cover the passenger as well was primarily based on the added safety risk placed on an …

Maryland v. Wilson - A Bright Line Rule?

The argument surrounding this case became an issue of police officer safety verses a constitutional right. In determining whether or not the Maryland v. Wilson case constituted an infringement of Fourth Amendment rights, the Supreme Court studied the case of Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977). In 1977 Harry Mimms was detained during a routine traffic stop due to an expired license plate. The officer ask…

Maryland v. Wilson - A Matter Of Safety

Attorney General Janet Reno presented what would be the strongest argument in favor of allowing officers to order passengers from lawfully stopped vehicles. Her primary concern revolved around police safety. In 1994, there were 5,762 officers assaulted in traffic stops. It was noted that there had been a 17-percent drop in fatalities of this nature since the Mimms decision. Reno essentially stated…

Maryland v. Wilson - Differing Opinions

Justices Stevens and Kennedy dissented from this decision. Justice Stevens's primary concern stemmed from the millions of other cases that would be affected by this decision. The ordering of passengers would apply equally to legally stopped traffic vehicles in which there was absolutely no sign of potential risk to the police officer. He pointed out that statistics did not carry the number of how …

Maryland v. Wilson - Impact

Matthew Shepard Beating Death Trial: 1999 - Worldwide Publicity, State Seeks Death, Surprise Ending [next] [back] Marw Albert Trial: 1997 - The Tape, Surprise Witness

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or

Vote down Vote up

8 days ago

Jebo

Officers can conduct a PAT-DOWN search for weapons of all persons in vehicle Arizona V. Johnson (passengers) and Terry v. Ohio for Subject. Officers may also conduct a PAT-DOWN search for weapons of the vehicle.

Vote down Vote up

about 3 years ago

Darren Chaker

It should be noted although police may detain passengers, they may not search absent consent or probable cause. Also, do not leave back pack, purse, etc. in car in the event driver gives consent to search, that consent would extend to items left in car.