Jeeper, you are condensing the Terry analysis. While it is true that the justification for the stop in Terry (for armed robbery) also justified the belief that the person involved was armed, the case and ensuing case law is pretty clear to me that the analysis is separate. Even the second to last paragraph of JL appears to draw the distinction. Are you arguing that an officer who stops someone on suspicion of something like public intoxication or shoplifting, and who has an independent basis for believing that the suspect is armed (pick whatever circumstances you deem appropriate-known gun carrier, suspicious bulge in the waistband area, creaking of gunleather, bullet falls out of his pants, whatever) cannot do a pat down search under a Terry analysis, and must find some other 4th amendment basis? What about a PC based pre-textual traffic stop, such as the one in Whren, or using a seatbelt violation, where the pc makes it easier to stop than to worry about reasonable suspicion for the stop? (I think this ties into the second to last paragraph of JL as well.)
As to the situation that sparked this debate, there is no way to know the answer without knowing the knowledge, training and experience of the officer, and the facts that he observed. While I think it would be common knowledge to say that most traffic stops do not result in pat down searches or field sobriety maneuvers, it doesn’t mean that those cannot be justified, and, in fact, many are justified every day. We just don’t know. A citizen clearly is within his rights to inquire, after the incident, concerning the basis for the detention, and the police should take no issue with explaining.
As to the situation that sparked this debate, there is no way to know the answer without knowing the knowledge, training and experience of the officer, and the facts that he observed. While I think it would be common knowledge to say that most traffic stops do not result in pat down searches or field sobriety maneuvers, it doesn’t mean that those cannot be justified, and, in fact, many are justified every day. We just don’t know. A citizen clearly is within his rights to inquire, after the incident, concerning the basis for the detention, and the police should take no issue with explaining.
