Business Law - Questions | Assignment

Running head: BUSINESS LAW
BUSINESS LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1BUSINESS LAW
Question 1
Issue
The issue in the given scenario is whether the actions of the police and arrest of the black
men can be regarded as justified.
Rule
The case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) shall be considered to be a relevant case in
this regard. In this case it was stated that the prohibition in relation to unreasonable seizures and
searches as mentioned in the ‘Fourth Amendment’, shall not be considered to be violated when a
suspect is stopped and frisked by police on the street without any possible cause for making an
arrest, if it is reasonably believed by the police that the individual has committed, or may commit
an offence, and the individual is carrying arms or weapons, and might be dangerous.
In the case of United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984), it was held that the utilization
of electric beeper gadget in order to observe a container of ether, without any kind of warrant,
shall result in an unlawful search.
The case of United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56 (1950) shall be considered to be a
significant case in this regard. In this case, it was stated that any seizure and search shall be
considered to be incidental in relation to a lawful arrest. It was stated that a reasonable search
shall not have any specific fixed formula, it shall depend upon the instances of each case.
In the case of United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975), it was stated that the
issue relating to race may be considered to be a factor that is resulting in the reasonable suspicion
regarding any criminal activity.

2BUSINESS LAW
In the case of United States v. Anderson, 923 F.2d 450, 455 (6th Cir. 1991), it was stated
that suspicions that are grounded exclusively on the race of any particular individual cannot
result in a reasonable suspicion, which may justify a ‘Terry stop’.
Application
Applying Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) in the given scenario, it may be said that the
police did not conduct any seizure or search upon the black men, and directly arrested them after
the manager of the Starbucks store called the police.
In the case of United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56 (1950) it was stated that any
seizure and search shall be considered to be incidental in relation to a lawful arrest. However, in
the given scenario, no seizure or search were made before making the lawful arrest.
Applying United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975) in the given scenario, it
may be said that the issue relating to race shall be considered to be a factor, which resulted in the
reasonable suspicion regarding any criminal activity.
Applying United States v. Anderson, 923 F.2d 450, 455 (6th Cir. 1991) in the given
scenario, it must be mentioned that suspicions grounded exclusively on the race of any particular
individual, cannot result in a reasonable suspicion.
Conclusion
To conclude, it may be said that the actions of the police and arrest of the black men were
not justified.

3BUSINESS LAW
Question 2
Johnson utilized the shared values of Starbucks to give effect to his decisions after the
arrests in relation to the black men were made. For instance, introduction of the “Use of Third
Place Policy” was such a decision.

4BUSINESS LAW
References
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975).
United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984).
United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56 (1950).