## Facts

- Minneapolis police officers saw Timothy Dickerson leave a building known for crack cocaine activity.
- After Dickerson noticed a marked squad car, he abruptly changed direction and walked into an alley.
- Officers stopped Dickerson and conducted a protective patdown search for weapons under *Terry v. Ohio*.
- The frisk revealed no weapons, but an officer felt a small lump in Dickerson’s jacket pocket.
- The officer manipulated the lump with his fingers and concluded it felt like crack cocaine packaged in cellophane.
- The officer reached into the pocket and seized a plastic bag containing crack cocaine.
- Dickerson was charged with possession of a controlled substance and moved to suppress the cocaine.
- The trial court denied suppression, treating the seizure as analogous to “plain view.”
- The Minnesota appellate courts upheld the stop and frisk but held the seizure unconstitutional and suppressed the evidence.

## Issues

1. Whether the Fourth Amendment permits warrantless seizure of nonthreatening contraband detected by touch during a lawful *Terry* patdown.
2. Whether the officer’s handling of the object in Dickerson’s pocket stayed within *Terry*’s limits such that the seizure was constitutional.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed suppression of the cocaine.
- The Court held that the Fourth Amendment permits a “plain feel” seizure during a lawful *Terry* frisk when the object’s identity as contraband is immediately apparent from its contour or mass.
- The Court held the seizure here unconstitutional because the officer determined the object was contraband only after manipulating it beyond what was necessary to assess whether it was a weapon.
- The Court rejected a categorical rule barring all seizures of contraband detected by touch during a patdown.

## Legal Principles

- A *Terry* frisk is a limited protective search for weapons; if it goes beyond what is necessary to determine whether the suspect is armed, it becomes invalid and its fruits must be suppressed.
- During a lawful *Terry* patdown, an officer may seize an item if its contraband character is immediately apparent through touch, without additional probing.
- “Plain feel” is a tactile analogue to “plain view” and is justified only when the lawful frisk already authorizes the contact and the incriminating character is apparent at once.
- Manipulating, squeezing, sliding, or otherwise exploring an object after it is apparent the item is not a weapon is an additional search not justified by officer-safety concerns and ordinarily requires probable cause and a warrant.

## Conclusion

The Court recognized a limited “plain feel” doctrine allowing seizure of contraband detected during a lawful *Terry* patdown when its illicit nature is immediately apparent, but held the seizure in this case unconstitutional because the officer exceeded *Terry*’s scope by manipulating the object to determine it was cocaine.


Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993)