Racial Profiling Reports 2015 Racial Profiling Report - Page 52

G. Compilation and analysis of data H. Exemption from reporting – audio/video equipment I. Officer non-liability J. Funding K. Required training in racial profiling 1. Police chiefs 2. All holders of intermediate certificates and/or two-year-old licenses as of 09/01/2001 (training to be completed no later than 09/01/2003) – see legislation 77R-SB1074 1.1.2 LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will become familiar with Supreme Court decisions and other court decisions involving appropriate actions in traffic stops. A. Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769 (1996) 1. Motor vehicle search exemption 2. Traffic violation acceptable as pretext for further investigation 3. Selective enforcement can be challenged B. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968) 1. Stop & Frisk doctrine 2. Stopping and briefly detaining a person 3. Frisk and pat down C. Other cases 1. Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330 (1977) 2. Maryland v. Wilson, 117 S.Ct. 882 (1997) 3. Graham v. State, 119 MdApp 444, 705 A.2d 82 (1998) 4. Pryor v. State, 122 Md.App. 671 (1997) cert. denied 352 Md. 312, 721 A.2d 990 (1998) 5. Ferris v. State, 355 Md. 356, 735 A.2d 491 (1999) 6. New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981) 2.0 RACIAL PROFILING AND THE COMMUNITY 2.1 UNIT GOAL: The student will be able to identify logical and social arguments against racial profiling.