# Sibron v. New York > Supreme Court of the United States · June 10, 1968 · 392 U.S. 40 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423759 ## Case - **Full name:** Sibron v. New York - **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States - **Decided:** June 10, 1968 - **Citations:** 392 U.S. 40; 44 Ohio Op. 2d 402; 88 S. Ct. 1889; 20 L. Ed. 2d 917; 1968 U.S. LEXIS 1346 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Concurrence by White - **Judges:** Warren, Douglas, White, Fortas, Harlan, Black - **Cited by:** 3,502 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423759 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - holding that “[n]othing resembling probable cause existed” when an officer merely observed an individual talking to a number of known narcotics addicts, did not know the nature of the conversations, and saw nothing pass between them; the inference that persons who talk to addi… - stating 12 that “deliberately furtive actions and flight at the approach of strangers or law officers 13 are strong indicia of mens rea, and when coupled with specific knowledge on the part 14 of the officer relating the suspect to the evidence of crime, they are proper factor… - stating that “deliberately furtive actions and flight at the approach of strangers or law officers are strong indicia of mens rea, and when coupled with specific knowledge on the part of the officer relating the suspect to the evidence of crime, they are proper factors to be c… - explaining that because of the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness re- Cite as: 576 U. S. ____ (2015) 5 ALITO, J., dissenting quirement, “[t]he constitutional validity of a warrantless search is pre-eminently the sort of question which can only be decided in the concrete factual… - recognizing, in the context of deciding whether to "entertain[ ] moot controversies," that "it is far better to eliminate the source of a potential legal disability than to require the citizen to suffer the possibly unjustified consequences of the disability itself for an inde… ## Opinion text Mr. Justice White, concurring. I join Parts I-IV of the Court’s opinion. With respect to appellant Peters, I join the affirmance of his conviction, not because there was probable cause to arrest, a question I do not reach, but because there was probable cause to stop Peters for questioning and thus to frisk him for dangerous weapons. See my concurring *70 opinion in Terry v. Ohio, ante, p. 34. While patting down Peters’ clothing the officer “discovered an object in his pocket which might have been used as a weapon.” Ante, at 67. That object turned out to be a package of burglar’s tools. In my view those tools were properly admitted into evidence. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423759. Public record. Not legal advice.