NCJ Number
99926
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 54 Issue: 11 Dated: (November 1985) Pages: 25-31
Date Published
1985
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This article examines factors which justify an investigative stop and reviews court cases which address the permissible scope of such a stop.
Abstract
In Terry v. Ohio (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court held that an officer making an investigative stop must know 'specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion.' Thus, the facts known by the officer must support a reasonable belief (from the perspective of a neutral magistrate) that the person stopped has been, is, or is about to be involved in crime. Supreme Court rulings also indicate how the stopping officer may obtain the information required for the stop. The information may be based on the officer's firsthand observations or secondhand (hearsay) sources. In the latter case, other information known by the officer must give credence to the secondhand information. Also, officers may make a stop based on requests from other law enforcement officers and agencies, e.g., police bulletins and flyers. Further, the stopping officers and the courts which review the stops must consider the totality of circumstances. This means that all of the facts known and appraised by an experienced officer, taken together, logically produce a reasonable belief the subjects of the stop are criminally culpable. Forty-one footnotes are listed.