Civil Rights Groups, Criminal Defense Lawyers Call on Baltimore Police to Curtail Stop-and-Frisk

under Crime Stories, Personal Injury

Written by Tracy Manzer, Managing Editor Price Benowitz LLP

The ACLU of Maryland has challenged the Baltimore Police Department to meaningfully monitor its use of the highly controversial “stop-and-frisk” tactic after finding less than one percent of the individuals stopped by Baltimore police officers last year were actually searched.

In a recent press release, the ACLU included the BPD’s most recent response to a Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) request for information on the department’s use of stop-and-frisk over the last several years. In that response, the police department noted that of the 123,121 stops conducted by its officers in 2012, only 494 of those people were searched. The results of the searches were even less impressive with the department logging the seizure of just 10 controlled substances, nine guns and one knife.

In its public call for change, the ACLU expressed skepticism of the numbers released by the BPD and lambasted the department for failing to monitor its officers despite long-standing complaints about the policy.

The Baltimore Police Department is not alone in the use of the often criticized tactic. The New York Police Department’s use of stop-and-frisk was heavily curtailed earlier this summer following a 198-page ruling issued by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin. In her ruling, the judge appointed an independent monitor to ensure the NYPD reforms its much maligned policy. That ruling unleashed a cascade of questions from law enforcement and political leaders across the nation, including Virginia Congressmen Bobby Scott and Bob Goodlatte, both of whom agreed the city’s stop-and-frisk policy is in dire need of an overhaul.

Facing increasing public scrutiny this year, the BPD in September said it would no longer use the term stop-and-frisk, and instead would refer to such interactions as “investigative stops.” The new name, however, does not appear to have come with new training requirements for officers on how and when to perform such questionable stops.

The term stop-and-frisk describes a search where a police officer who is suspicious of a person stops, or detains the individual, under the suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous. Stop-and-frisk searches are also sometimes called “Terry stops,” which refer to the U.S. Supreme Court decision that held such searches were not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The method became popular as part of the BPD’s zero-tolerance policing strategy a decade ago, and Baltimore police have faced scrutiny over the practice ever since. Though its use has been scaled back in favor of a more targeted law enforcement approach, a number of civil rights organizations and criminal justice officials still question the practice. Chief among their concerns is the fact that law enforcement has gained little in the way of actual evidence and arrests – which is proven by their own statistics – and such tactics do far more harm than good by fueling long-standing frustration and resentment within many of the communities the police are tasked to serve.

For more information on stop-and-frisk tactics, and how these actions and other questionable police procedures can affect someone who has been charged with a crime, contact the Maryland criminal law offices. Our team of experienced and dedicated Maryland criminal defense attorneys will take the time to investigate every aspect of your case, or the case of someone you love, to ensure your rights weren’t trampled by over-zealous officers.