No. 18-7156
Antonez Terril Johnson v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: arrest federal-circuit-split fourth-amendment investigative-detention investigatory-stop investigatory-stops pedestrian-stop probable-cause reasonableness-standard scope-and-duration terry-stop terry-v-ohio
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
Latest Conference:
2019-01-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether pedestrian Terry stops based on probable cause do or do not equate to arrest
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has held, in several traffic stop cases, that investigatory stops based on probable cause can violate the Fourth Amendment in scope and duration under the standard set in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). This writ of certiorari asks whether the same applies to pedestrian stops based on probable cause or whether, as the Eleventh Circuit held in this case, United States v. Johnson, No. 17-13726, 2018 WL 4846324 (11th Cir. Oct. 4, 2018), those stops equate to an arrest, which relinquishes courts from inquiring into the reasonableness of the scope and duration of the stop.
Docket Entries
2019-01-22
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.
2018-12-27
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-12-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2019)
Attorneys
Antonez Johnson
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent