468 U.S. at 439-40. is no per se rule about the length of time a suspect See Berkemer, “[T]here may be detained before the detention becomes a rather, court must examine fullscale arrest”; “the the reasonableness of the 50 F.3d at 1192 (holding that detention of fifteen Baker, detention.” “a minutes time to identify and release a fairly large group of people during a is not drug raid” assessing the effect of the length of the the Court into “unreasonable”). “[I]n detention,” “take[s] account whether the police diligently pursue their 462 U.S. 696, 709 U.S. v. Place, investigation.” (1983). A stop carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion. In Terry Carman 749 F.3d 192 (3d Cir. 2014), an officer was searching for an armed man and v. Carroll, encountered an unidentified man who turned away and appeared to reach for his waist. The officer grabbed the until he saw that the man was unarmed. The court upheld a jury verdict man’s arm that the officer acted reasonably in grabbing the arm. man’s As noted in the Comment to Instruction 4.12.2, in the case of a warrantless arrest, Third Circuit caselaw divides as to the burden of proof regarding probable cause. By contrast, the caselaw does not appear to have addressed the burden of proof regarding reasonable suspicion in the case of a stop; but one district court decision concerning an analogous issue suggests that Terry the burden would be on the plaintiff. 767 F. Supp. See Armington v. School Dist. of Philadelphia, 661, 667 (E.D.Pa.) (in Section 1983 case involving order that bus driver undergo school district’s urinalysis, holding that the bus driver plaintiff the burden of proving that defendant lacked “has reasonable 941 F.2d 1200 (3d Cir. 1991). without opinion, suspicion”), aff’d
See Berkemer, 468 U.S. at 439-40. “[T]here is no per se rule about the length of time a suspect may be detained before the detention becomes a fullscale arrest”; rather, “the court must examine the reasonableness of the detention.” Baker, 50 F.3d at 1192 (holding that “a detention of fifteen minutes time to identify and release a fairly large group of people during a drug raid” is not “unreasonable”). “[I]n assessing the effect of the length of the detention,” the Court “take[s] into account whether the police diligently pursue their investigation.” U.S. v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 709 (1983). A Terry stop carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion. In Carman v. Carroll, 749 F.3d 192 (3d Cir. 2014), an officer was searching for an armed man and encountered an unidentified man who turned away and appeared to reach for his waist. The officer grabbed the man’s arm until he saw that the man was unarmed. The court upheld a jury verdict that the officer acted reasonably in grabbing the man’s arm. As noted in the Comment to Instruction 4.12.2, in the case of a warrantless arrest, Third Circuit caselaw divides as to the burden of proof regarding probable cause. By contrast, the caselaw does not appear to have addressed the burden of proof regarding reasonable suspicion in the case of a Terry stop; but one district court decision concerning an analogous issue suggests that the burden would be on the plaintiff. See Armington v. School Dist. of Philadelphia, 767 F. Supp. 661, 667 (E.D.Pa.) (in Section 1983 case involving school district’s order that bus driver undergo urinalysis, holding that the bus driver plaintiff “has the burden of proving that defendant lacked reasonable suspicion”), aff’d without opinion, 941 F.2d 1200 (3d Cir. 1991).