Full Answer Section

• Constitutionality: Judged under the Fourth Amendment against the standard of reasonableness. Courts consider the totality of the circumstances, including the level of suspicion, the nature of the intrusion, and the officer’s safety concerns.

Arrest:

• Definition: The taking of a person into custody for the purpose of charging them with a crime.
• Level of proof: Probable cause, which means a reasonable belief that the person has committed a crime. This belief must be based on facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe the same.
• Purpose: To bring the individual before a judge to answer charges.
• Duration: Can last longer than a stop and frisk, but still subject to prompt judicial review.
• Scope: Officer can conduct a full search incident to arrest for weapons and evidence related to the arrest.
• Constitutionality: Judged under the Fourth Amendment against the standard of probable cause.

Similarities:

• Both involve seizures of the person, albeit with different levels of intrusiveness.
• Both require justification based on specific facts and circumstances.
• Both must comply with the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Differences:

• Level of proof: Reasonable suspicion for stop and frisk, probable cause for arrest.
• Purpose: Investigation for stop and frisk, bringing charges for arrest.
• Duration: Brief for stop and frisk, longer (but subject to review) for arrest.
• Scope of search: Limited pat-down for stop and frisk, full search incident to arrest.

Standards of Constitutionality:

The specific circumstances of each case influence how the Court judges its constitutionality. Factors considered include:

• Nature of the stop or arrest: Was it based on specific and articulable facts or just a hunch?
• Level of intrusion: Was the stop or search proportional to the suspicion or purpose?
• Officer’s safety concerns: Were there legitimate concerns about the individual being armed or dangerous?
• Community’s interests: Did the stop or arrest address a legitimate public safety concern?

Court Decisions:

Landmark cases like Terry v. Ohio (stop and frisk) and Wong Sun v. United States (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine) established the legal framework for analyzing these seizures. Subsequent cases have refined these standards based on specific situations.

Stationhouse Detention:

• Reasonable:
  • When necessary to conduct brief questioning or booking procedures after an arrest.
  • When there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and evidence may be lost if not detained.
• Unreasonable:
  • When prolonged without justification or probable cause for arrest.
  • When used as a pretext for further investigation without proper grounds.

Court Reasoning:

Courts balance the individual’s liberty interest against the government’s need for investigation and public safety. Unreasonable detentions violate the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable seizures.