Illinois+v.+Wardlow


 * Summary**: Police officers were patrolling a section in Chicago that was known for narcotics. As they were patrolling the area they saw a man, William "Sam" Wardlow, running with a bag in his hands. When the police first saw him running the immediately thought that Wardlow was carring a gun in the bag. Then when the police caught him and patted Wardlow down. The police found that he was carring a gun and they then aressted him.


 * Majortity Opinion:** The Supreme Court had a 5 to 4 decision that the police had a reasonable cause to stop Wardlow and see if he had a gun.


 * Dissenting Opinion:** Justice, John Paul Stevens, was against that the police had a reasonable cause to stop William Wardlow. He believed that there was not enough evidence of reasonable suspicion. Therefore he thinks that the police should not have stopped Wardlow from running.