Useful case law on stop and frisk?

Useful case law on stop and frisk?

• A. Officers may consider knowledge of a suspect's past criminal behavior is irrelevant
• B. Past criminal behavior cannot be considered
• C. Officers may consider knowledge of a suspect's past criminal behavior in determining reasonable suspicion for stop and frisk
• D. Past behavior automatically establishes probable cause

Answer: (C)

Reasonable suspicion is evaluated by the totality of the circumstances. Information about a suspect’s past criminal behavior can be relevant because it informs the officer about the person’s propensity or history, which, when combined with current observations (location, time, behavior, evasive actions), can make a stop reasonable. It is not enough on its own and does not amount to probable cause, but it is permissible as one factor in the analysis. This reflects the Terry v. Ohio framework that allows considering a broader set of factors to justify a brief stop and possible frisk.

Reasonable suspicion is evaluated by the totality of the circumstances. Information about a suspect’s past criminal behavior can be relevant because it informs the officer about the person’s propensity or history, which, when combined with current observations (location, time, behavior, evasive actions), can make a stop reasonable. It is not enough on its own and does not amount to probable cause, but it is permissible as one factor in the analysis. This reflects the Terry v. Ohio framework that allows considering a broader set of factors to justify a brief stop and possible frisk.