Under reasonable suspicion, which scenario justifies detaining someone?

Under reasonable suspicion, which scenario justifies detaining someone?

• A. a warrant exists
• B. the person consents
• C. the officer believes there is probable cause
• D. a crime is afoot

Answer: (D)

The situation tested is the use of a Terry stop: briefly detaining someone when there is a specific, objective basis to believe that criminal activity is occurring or about to occur. When a crime is afoot, the officer has seen conduct or circumstances that point to ongoing or imminent wrongdoing, which satisfies the reasonable-suspicion threshold for a short detention while they investigate further. Warrants require probable cause and are not based on a mere hunch or suspicion, so they aren’t the right basis for a stop. Consent can authorize detention or questioning regardless of suspicion, so it also isn’t about reasonable suspicion. Belief that there is probable cause is a higher standard that typically justifies arrest, not a brief stop. Therefore, the most fitting scenario for detaining someone under reasonable suspicion is when a crime is afoot.

The situation tested is the use of a Terry stop: briefly detaining someone when there is a specific, objective basis to believe that criminal activity is occurring or about to occur. When a crime is afoot, the officer has seen conduct or circumstances that point to ongoing or imminent wrongdoing, which satisfies the reasonable-suspicion threshold for a short detention while they investigate further.

Warrants require probable cause and are not based on a mere hunch or suspicion, so they aren’t the right basis for a stop. Consent can authorize detention or questioning regardless of suspicion, so it also isn’t about reasonable suspicion. Belief that there is probable cause is a higher standard that typically justifies arrest, not a brief stop. Therefore, the most fitting scenario for detaining someone under reasonable suspicion is when a crime is afoot.