Under what condition can an officer conduct a stop-and-frisk?

A stop-and-frisk, also known as a Terry stop, is a practice where law enforcement officers briefly detain a person based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. This legal doctrine allows officers to stop a person for questioning when they have a valid, articulable reason to suspect that the individual is involved in criminal behavior, even if they do not have probable cause for an arrest.

Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause, which requires more substantive evidence. In the context of law enforcement, reasonable suspicion can be based on specific observations, patterns of behavior, or information received from credible sources. This legal framework is designed to protect the public while simultaneously safeguarding individuals' rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

In contrast, conducting a stop-and-frisk based solely on an officer's discretion or whim does not meet the legal standards necessary to justify the action, as it could lead to arbitrary enforcement of the law. Similarly, a signed warrant or probable cause would not apply directly to the circumstances under which a stop-and-frisk is legally authorized. The essence of a stop-and-frisk lies in the officer’s reasonable suspicion that a person is involved in criminal activity, making this condition the correct basis for conducting such an encounter.