Reasonable suspicion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Image:Scale of justice 2.svg |
| Criminal procedure |
|---|
| Investigating and charging crimes |
| Criminal investigation |
|
Arrest warrant · Search warrant |
| Criminal prosecution |
|
Statute of limitations · Nolle prosequi |
| Charges and pleas |
|
Arraignment · Indictment |
| Related areas of law |
| Portals |
|
Law · Criminal justice |
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. It is the basis for an investigatory or Terry stop by the police and requires less evidence than probable cause, the legal requirement for arrests and warrants. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity; such suspicion is not a mere hunch. Police may also, based solely on reasonable suspicion of a threat to safety, frisk a suspect for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. A combination of particular facts, even if individually innocuous, can form the basis of reasonable suspicion.
Contents |
[edit] Precedent
In Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that a person can be stopped and frisked by a police officer based on a reasonable suspicion. Such a detention does not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizure. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada the court further established that a state may require, by law, that a person identify himself or herself to an officer during a stop. An arrest is not permitted based on reasonable suspicion; probable cause is required for an arrest. Further, a person is not required to answer any other questions during a Terry stop, and the detention must be brief.
[edit] Other Uses
[edit] Schools
New Jersey v. T. L. O. set the precedent that probable cause is not necessary to search a student; reasonable suspicion is enough to search a student's belongings. Overly intrusive searches, like a body cavity search, require probable cause.
[edit] Borders, Customs, and Immigration
Though U.S. Customs can do suspicionless searches of people and effects crossing the border (including passing through airport customs), non-routine searches, like slashing the spare tire of a car, require reasonable suspicion. United States v. Flores-Montano. Anything even more intrusive, like compelled surgery of a suspected balloon swallower, requires probable cause. United States v. Montoya De Hernandez.
[edit] Examples
Courts have ruled that a stop for a reasonable suspicion may be appropriate in the following cases: when a person possesses many unusual items which would be useful in a crime and appears agitated, when a person matches a description of a suspect, or when a person runs away at the sight of police officers. However, a reasonable suspicion may not apply merely because a person refuses to answer questions, declines to allow a voluntary search, or is of a suspected race or ethnicity.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- A definition on Dictionary.comde:Anfangsverdacht
