SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY The Fourth Amendment and ...

Chapter 3
Detentions:
General Rule: A police officer has the right to stop and temporarily detain
someone for investigation whenever the officer has a “reasonable suspicion”
some criminal activity is afoot and that the person was, . . . is, . . . or is about to be
involved in that criminal activity. (Terry v. Ohio (1968) 392 U.S. 1, 27 [20
L.Ed.2 nd 889, 909].)
“[A]n investigative stop or detention predicated on mere curiosity, rumor,
or hunch is unlawful, even though the officer may be acting in complete
good faith.” (In re Tony C. (1978) 21 Cal.3 rd 888, 893.)
A “stop and frisk” is constitutionally permissible if two conditions are
met:
The investigatory stop must be lawful; i.e., when a police officer
reasonably suspects that the person apprehended is committing or
has committed a criminal offense.
The police officer must reasonably suspect that the person stopped
is armed and dangerous.
(Arizona v. Johnson (2009) 555 U.S. 323 [172 L.Ed.2 nd
694].)
Detentions are sometimes referred to in the case law as simply an
“investigative stop,” particularly by the federal courts. (See United States
v. Kim (9 th Cir. 1994) 25 F.3 rd 1426; United States v. Summers (9 th Cir.
2001) 268 F.3 rd 683.)
Purpose: A detention is allowed so a peace officer may have a reasonable
amount of time to investigate a person’s possible involvement in an actual
or perceived criminal act, allowing the officer to make an informed
decision whether to arrest, or to release, the subject. “An investigative
detention must be temporary and last no longer than is necessary to
effectuate the purpose of the stop. Similarly, the investigative methods
employed should be the least intrusive means reasonably available to
verify or dispel the officer’s suspicion in a short period of time.” (In re
Antonio B. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4 th 435, 440.)
The plight and dangers of a police officer on the street on not lost on the
courts:
© 2012 Robert C. Phillips. All rights reserved
23