Which case approved extending the protective search for weapons beyond the actual person to include the passenger compartment of an automobile?

Which case approved extending the protective search for weapons beyond the actual person to include the passenger compartment of an automobile?

• A. Stop and Frisk
• B. Michigan v. Long (1983)
• C. Florida v. Royer (1983)
• D. Popple v. State

Answer: (B)

Extending a protective search for weapons to a vehicle’s interior is allowed when the officer has reasonable suspicion that the occupant is dangerous and may have a weapon. Michigan v. Long held that if this suspicion exists during a traffic stop, a limited protective search of the passenger compartment is permissible to locate weapons that could threaten the officer’s safety. The search must be narrow, focusing only on areas where a weapon could be placed or reached by the occupant. This distinction matters because it applies the same safety logic from a Terry stop to a stopped vehicle, but confines the search to the vehicle’s interior area that could conceal a weapon, rather than opening up the entire car to a broad search. The other cases relate to different aspects of stops or searches (such as the nature of the stop or searches of a person) and do not authorize extending the protective frisk to the car’s interior in the same way. Therefore, the case that approves this extension to the passenger compartment is Michigan v. Long.

Extending a protective search for weapons to a vehicle’s interior is allowed when the officer has reasonable suspicion that the occupant is dangerous and may have a weapon. Michigan v. Long held that if this suspicion exists during a traffic stop, a limited protective search of the passenger compartment is permissible to locate weapons that could threaten the officer’s safety. The search must be narrow, focusing only on areas where a weapon could be placed or reached by the occupant.

This distinction matters because it applies the same safety logic from a Terry stop to a stopped vehicle, but confines the search to the vehicle’s interior area that could conceal a weapon, rather than opening up the entire car to a broad search. The other cases relate to different aspects of stops or searches (such as the nature of the stop or searches of a person) and do not authorize extending the protective frisk to the car’s interior in the same way. Therefore, the case that approves this extension to the passenger compartment is Michigan v. Long.