Which case is associated with the plain feel doctrine?

Which case is associated with the plain feel doctrine?

• A. Terry v. Ohio
• B. Miranda v. Arizona
• C. Graham v. Connor
• D. Mapp v. Ohio

Answer: (A)

Plain feel arises when an officer is lawfully patting down a person during a Terry stop. If, during that pat-down, the officer immediately recognizes that an item is contraband by touch, without further manipulation, the officer may seize it. This principle comes from the stop-and-frisk framework established in Terry v. Ohio, which allowed a brief frisk for weapons based on reasonable suspicion. The other cases involve different protections: Miranda v. Arizona covers interrogation rights, Graham v. Connor sets the standard for reasonable-use-of-force, and Mapp v. Ohio extends the exclusionary rule to the states. So the plain feel doctrine is most closely connected to the Terry stop scenario.

Plain feel arises when an officer is lawfully patting down a person during a Terry stop. If, during that pat-down, the officer immediately recognizes that an item is contraband by touch, without further manipulation, the officer may seize it. This principle comes from the stop-and-frisk framework established in Terry v. Ohio, which allowed a brief frisk for weapons based on reasonable suspicion. The other cases involve different protections: Miranda v. Arizona covers interrogation rights, Graham v. Connor sets the standard for reasonable-use-of-force, and Mapp v. Ohio extends the exclusionary rule to the states. So the plain feel doctrine is most closely connected to the Terry stop scenario.