Exceptions to PC Requirement

Question 1

Stop/Frisk

Answer 1

i) Reasonable Suspicion?
(1) specific/articulable facts + reas. inferences–>more than a hunch, less than PC

(a) White: (Girl leaving house with drugs/prediction of future behavior) “Close case” in favor of RS
(b) J.L.: (caller see black man at bus stop; claims he is carrying gun) anon tip must be reliable in assertion of illegality, not just in its tendency to correctly identify person (anyone in public could see him)
(c) Navarette: RS without prediction of future events (drunk driving)
(d) Wardlow: “unprovoked” fleeing at sight of police is weighty factor in validating RS
(e) Racial Profiling–>Whren: 4A reas’ness of stops does not depend on subjective motivations

Question 2

Is it a valid Terry stop/frisk?

Answer 2

(1) RS that actor committing crime (stop portion)
(2) RS that suspect is armed/dangerous (frisk)

(i) can frisk purse (but not wallet); can do cursory “wingspan” frisk of car (more limited than Acevedo)
(ii) “weapons” = only reas’ly accessible weapons (wallet blades wouldn’t pass muster like for SIA)

(3) Was frisk limited so as to dispel RS/raise PC–>can ask for ID, Qs, frisk; can’t hover

Question 3

Non-law-enforcement

Answer 3

Individualized Suspicion not required–>balancing between gov interest/privacy intrusiveness

a) Administrative Warrants
i) Camara: warrant required for administrative (health) inspection

b) Administrative searches = valid w/o IS
i) employer/school drug test; airports = valid searches w/o IS

ii) DNA obtainment
(1) King: con’l for law enforcement to obtain DNA as part of booking procedures for serious offenses because of strong gov interest in identifying arrestee (past conduct, jail protection, not law enforcement reasons)