Minnesota v. Dickerson
Significance, Impact, Nightwalker Statutes, Further Readings
State of Minnesota
A police officer's patdown search of a person on the street and subsequent seizure of a small object does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Chief Lawyers for Petitioner
Michael O. Freeman, Beverly J. Wolfe
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Peter W. Gorman
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)
Harry A. Blackmun, William H. Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas
Date of Decision
7 June 1993
Police may seize contraband that is nonthreatening and detected through the sense of touch during a limited patdown search for weapons, but the search in Dickerson's case was unlawful because it exceeded the lawful bounds of such a search.
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
- Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (1983).
West's Encyclopedia of American Law. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 1998.
- Minnesota v. Olson - Significance, Impact
- Mike Tyson Trial: 1992 - Brutal Attack
- Minnesota v. Dickerson - Further Readings
- Minnesota v. Dickerson - Significance
- Minnesota v. Dickerson - Impact
- Minnesota v. Dickerson - Nightwalker Statutes
- Other Free Encyclopedias