Examples Of Probable Cause

Reasonable suspicion is different from probable cause as reasonable suspicion allows an officer to temporarily detain a person if the officer suspects the person of committing a crime, previously committed a crime, or is about to commit a crime. This will allow the officer the time to conduct an investigation that may allow him/her to find the facts that are required to arrest per probable cause. Therefore, reasonable suspicion is thought of to be a hunch

This allows them to diffuse the situation and to allow the parties to cool down. By arresting someone they are removing one of the parties from the situation completely. This protects the individuals in the middle of the dispute. He even states, "No officer wants to leave the parties together only to be

Moreover, in some cases, yes, the police and a few government officials do sometimes misuse the reasonable suspicion and probable cause, however, in most cases it is all sorted out by the time it reaches court. That being said, one of the more disturbing flaws in this article is that the reader is obtaining a misconception of the definitions of reasonable suspicion and probable cause. For instance, there is a distinctive difference between reasonable suspicion and probable cause. To better explain, reasonable suspicion is more of a feeling officers will get, such as sensible, rational or justifiable (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 204). In contrast, probable cause is used when someone, usually of the law enforcement variety, has a sound belief, supported by evidences and circumstances, that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 205). This article in question, did not explain the differences and even misused the terms reasonable suspicion and probable cause, and finally, only referenced one instance where an officer unjustly used probable cause. The officer in question received an anonymous tip in regards to a crime being committed, which legal gave

Reasonable Suspicion: is the legal standard by which a police officer has the right to briefly detain a suspect for investigatory purposes and frisk the outside of their clothing for weapons, but not drugs. While many factors contribute to a police officer’s level of authority in a given situation, the reasonable suspicion standard requires facts or circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a suspect has, is, or will commit a crime.

Even if the evidence proves guilt or the contraband is known to be there, officers must implement proper procedure of search and seizure or risk the evidence being suppressed in court. The same can be stated for the seizure of a person as well. To deprive one of freedom requires more than just a hunch of a police officer. This ensures that citizen’s right is not infringed on without a meaningful reason. It also means that police officers need to practice proper police work when seizing suspects. Civil and even criminal court charges can be brought up against a police officer who use excessive force or lack proper evidence.

2. Investigation—sufficient evidence, known as probable cause, must be gathered to identify and support a legal arrest of a suspect.

Pertaining to the differences between probable cause and reasonable suspicion within law enforcement can determine the difference between a legal search and seizure and police officers obtaining evidence in an illegal manner. Officers need to handle each situation when probable cause and reasonable suspicion is involved. Determining what is reasonable and what is not takes great skill, perseverance, comprehension of the law, and an innate intuitiveness on the part of the officer.

New York City has a policy in place known as the Stop and Frisk policy. According to New York Criminal Procedure (2012), if a police officer, “suspects that (a) person is

Upon arrival, Officer Wheeler activated his (BWC1) body worn camera which was later uploaded to evidence.com. As our patrol vehicle pulled up to St. Luke’s emergency room entrance, I viewed a male later identified as (RV1) Devinelle Lavaughn Broussard with a cellphone in his hand attempting to prevent a female, later identified as (B1) Eleasia Ashanti Fraise, from throwing a (EVD1) red brick. I next saw Fraise throw the brick at a parked (D1) silver BMW, located along the south side walk. The brick fell to the ground and Fraise went to picked it back up. Fraise picked the brick up and moved in the direction of our patrol vehicle with the brick at shoulder height. I parked the patrol vehicle and immediately got out drawing my firearm to a low ready. Officer Broussard stepped out of the vehicle and drew firearm pointing it at Fraise (View Officer Wheeler’s statement for further details). Officer Wheeler and I gave commands to Fraise to drop the brick. Fraise immediately complied and dropped the brick. I holstered my firearm

Reasonable suspicion could lead to discrimination or racial profiling. Did you hear about what Massachusetts did? The highest court of Massachusetts ruled that African Americans that voluntarily flee from police encounters generally have a reason to do so based on fear. The ruling came into play after a case against a man named Jimmy Warren. The suspect was accused of unlawfully possessing a firearm and evaded the police when he was approached. According to the police officers, there were multiple break-ins that occurred in the neighborhood and the suspect fit the description. Later, the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts ruled that the police should have not stopped the individual because he did not violate any laws and was not guilty

A law enforcement officer bears the responsibility of investigating arresting and assisting the victims. He arrests the perpetrator when he believes it is in order to do so. While this enables the officer to perform his work, the decision to arrest or not to is left to the discretion and judgment of the officer which would be subjective or downright faulty. The perpetrator can then theoretically get away with the incident or an innocent person wrongly

In 1986, six of the 50 states passed laws requiring arrest when there is enough probable cause. For example if the police show up to a domestic violence call and the victim doesn’t want to press charges, in some cases law enforcement was not required to make an arrest simply because they were called into in or even if the victim displays signs of abuse. Now, because of that legislation law enforcement is required by law to make an arrest of the perpetrator if the victim displays bruising and injuries even if the victim denies any harm have been done. All a cop needs to make an arrest is probable cause, as we all know probable cause is easier to prove than Proof beyond a reasonable doubt that can be left to the courts to decide. (Meadows, 2013).

Now that I informed the police about the most basic measures of searches and seizure from historic cases of police mistakes, here are some correct things you can do that won’t penalized you. The Court’s decision in Terry vs Ohio explicitly signals that police can act on more than a “hunch” and that if it is protecting an officer’s safety, you can seize someone’s weapons. In the case with United States vs. Sokolow and his circumstance, you learn that you can search his bag if you have reasonable suspicion that respondent was engaged in illegal wrongdoing. Also, the Court’s decision in Illinois vs Wardlow explicitly signals that if a police officer has justification to suspect that the accuses was involved in criminal activity, he can investigate

There are three types of meetings that occur between citizens and law enforcement. They are voluntary, an investigative stop and arrest by probable cause. The voluntary can be either an encounter or conversation. The investigative stop is where the officer has a reasonable suspicion to believe there is a crime. This is called a “Terry Stop”. This is because in the case Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous." The probable cause arrest is where there is information to make the office believe that the person committed a crime. Even though all citizens are allowed to move about freely with the interference by the government, the police with engage in a voluntary conversation with people. Each individual has the right to not talk or to stop talking in this causal conversation at any time.

Probable cause is a requirement which can be found in the Fourteenth Amendment that must usually be met before an arrest can be made, before being allowed to conduct a search, seize property, and to receive a warrant which is related to the alleged crime. Probable cause is considered a level of reasonable belief, probable cause must be based on facts and not an assumption. In civil court, a person can be sued if they have probable cause, and in criminal court, the defendant can be prosecuted or arrested if they also have probable cause. If the officer cannot prove probable cause, unfortunately, the evidence then becomes inadmissible, and the evidence will be thrown out.