Frequently Asked Questions

What is Reasonable Suspicion?

The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and its protections extended to brief investigatory stops of persons or vehicle falling short of arrest. A reasonable suspicion determination is made by the totality of the circumstances of each case to see whether the detaining officer had a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing. Past cases have recognized reasonable suspicion was a somewhat abstract notion – a deliberate intent to avoid a neat set of legal rules. Rather than viewing incidents in isolation, the proper test is to look at factors as a whole to determine if there is reasonable suspicion.

A police officer can conduct an investigative stop and briefly detain and question a person for investigative purposes when the officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts. Subsequent to a valid Terry stop, a police officer can search the individual for weapons where the officer has reason to believe the person is armed and dangerous. In assessing whether the suspect is armed, the officer doesn't have to be absolutely certain; the issue is whether a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.

Can a Police Officer Ask me Questions for No Reason?

Three types of police-citizen encounters have been recognized: 1) consensual interviews, 2) investigatory stops, and 3) arrests. Arrests and investigatory stops are seizures that implicate constitutional protections. Investigatory stops are justified by reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity, while lawful arrests require probable cause. An investigatory stop is less intrusive than an arrest and is considered reasonable if it is supported by some minimal level of objective justification designated reasonable articulable suspicion.

A consensual interview is not a seizure and occurs when a police officer seeks the voluntary cooperation of a citizen by asking noncoercive questions. An officer's act of approaching an individual in a public place or asking for identification does not, in itself, constitute a seizure. Consensual encounters do not trigger Fourth Amendment scrutiny. Unlike detentions, they require no articulable suspicion that the person has committed or is about to commit a crime. A detention is not affected by merely approaching someone on the street or other public places. Even without any particular suspicion, an officer can walk up to someone and pose questions – provided they do not induce cooperation by coervice means. This does not mean that the person has to answer the questions; without reasonable suspicion, the person can simply walk away. In determining whether it was a consensual encounter or a detention, particular focus is paid to the intimidation and coercive conduct of the police officers. Circumstances establishing seizure might include: the presence of several officers, an officer's display of weapons, some physical touching of the person, or the use of language or of a tone of voice indicating cooperation with the officer might be compelled. If it is a detention, probable cause is required.

Police detentions become custodial and require probable cause when the detention becomes coercive to the extent that it functions as an arrest. The factors used to determine whether the detention becomes an arrest are: the basis for the detention; its length; its location; whether the suspect was transported against his will, how far, and why; whether restrains were used; whether the police officer showed, threatened, or used force; and the investigative methods employed to confirm or dispel suspicions.

If I get pulled over, does a tip provide probable cause to search my car?

First, a traffic violation serves as an objectively reasonable basis to pull over a car and briefly detain the occupants. A lawful traffic stop, even if it is a pretext to stop the driver for a drug violation, is reasonable regardless of the police officer's motivation.

Prolonged detention is only justified by a change in circumstances after the initial traffic stop or probable cause. Probable cause to arrest gives an officer the right to arrest and perform a subsequent search incident to the arrest. The probable cause can be supplied by an informant's information (tip), if it is a reliable tip and it is corroborated. corroborated. In a bit of circular logic, if the search reveals what the tipster suggested would be there, the tip is then corroborated, and the evidence has a better chance of being admitted in court.

What is a Three Strikes Law?

Three strikes laws are a category of statutes enacted by state governments to ensure long periods of imprisonment for persons convicted of a felony on three separate occasions. The term is adapted from baseball and is usually colloquial in its usage. Three Strikes Laws are usually referred to in the legal field as "mandatory sentencing laws."

The philosophy behind three strikes laws state that a person who commits more than two felonies is usually a chronic, habitual criminal incapable of reform. Three strikes laws mandate permanent imprisonment for the safety of society.

What are Rape Shield Laws?

Rape Shield Laws, which exist in all states except Arizona , basically limit the use of a victim's prior sexual history by the defense in an effort to undermine the credibility of a rape victim's testimony. Rape shield laws arose in the 1970s because, legally, the primary elements of rape are a sexual encounter and unwillingness of one participant. Because consent may or may not be manifested verbally during a sexual encounter, that element is difficult to prove.

Because of that difficulty, the credibility of the accuser and the accused are crucial, especially where evidence of sexual activity on the part of the accused tends to cast doubt on the accuser's truthfulness. Accordingly, rape victims who had been sexually active prior to their assault were deemed legally less credible than those who had not been.

However, a woman's sexual history should not be relevant to her truthfulness. As such, rape shield laws were passed so that accusers could exclude sexual history on that basis. Further, rape shield laws were passed to increase the reporting of rape and its successful conviction because fear of being revictimized by debasing and humiliating cross-examination on their past discouraged victims from reporting and pursuing charges.

What is Megan's Law?

Every state in the country has enacted a statute designed to protect its communities from sex offenders and to help apprehend repeat sex offenders, called Megan's Law, in response to the murder of 7-year-old Megan Kanka by a convicted sex offender living in her neighborhood in 1999. Megan's Law applies to all persons convicted of criminal offenses against a minor, violent and nonviolent sexual offenses, and felonies committed for a sexual purpose. Covered offenders must register with the state's department of public safety (DPS) upon their release into the community. Each must provide personal information (including his name, address, photograph, and DNA sample), notify DPS of any change in residence, and periodically submit an updated photograph. In most states, the registration requirement runs for 10 years and those convicted of sexually violent offenses must register for life.

I didn't know the law. Can I be charged with a crime?

Yes. Ignorance of the law is never an adequate defense, no matter what state the law was in, or whether you lived in that state or not. If you are of age, you are charged with knowledge of the law, whether or not you actually knew it, regardless of the crime. You may argue that a law was unconstitutional, unfair, or applied selectively, but you will never win with "I didn't know the law."

What Can I do About Email Harassment?

Law enforcement agencies estimate that electronic communications are a factor in from 20 percent to 40 percent of all stalking cases. If you are being harassed, or even stalked, via email, you have a couple of options, particularly if you know who the person sending you the emails is. First, contact the senders ISP (Internet Service Provider) and make a complaint, which could result in this person losing their email account, and, at any rate, sets up a trail of evidence. Second, keep all the emails sent to you as further evidence. Third, do not reply to the harasser. Fourth, if there are threats of violence, or of a sexual nature, you should contact your local law enforcement agency immediately, because this can constitute a crime.

Many areas do not have specific laws that cover email harassment, or cyberstalking. However, in most areas, previously existing laws covering stalking are often applicable to cyberstalking. You can get a complete list of cyberstalking laws, or at least state laws that apply to email harassment at the National Conference of State Legislators.

Don't take chances with you life! Let Crime Attorneys answer all your questions regarding your individual situation.