Phillip George O’hara, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that a pat‑down search does not require the officer to be afraid and that routine alone does not justify a frisk, but in this case the officer had specific, articulable facts—including the belt‑knife, solitary night patrol, and rural setting—sufficient to support the search. A concurring opinion agreed with the majority’s reasoning, while a dissent argued that the timing and routine nature of the frisk made it unconstitutional.