Final answer:
Reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop is a law enforcement officer's belief that a person has or is about to commit a crime, based on concrete facts, which allows for a stop and frisk without a warrant. It must not be based on race or ethnicity to prevent racial profiling. It is distinct from probable cause, which is a higher standard for obtaining warrants.
Step-by-step explanation:
What Constitutes Reasonable Suspicion for a Terry Stop?
Reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop is defined as the belief by law enforcement that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime. This belief must be based on specific and articulable facts, rather than merely a hunch. Established by Terry v. Ohio, a reasonable suspicion allows officers to stop an individual and conduct a frisk if they also suspect that the person is armed and dangerous, without violating the Fourth Amendment.
The concept of reasonable suspicion also applies in situations like public school searches (New Jersey v. T.L.O.), searches of vehicles, and searches at international borders. However, it's important to note that reasonable suspicion has limitations to prevent racial profiling and unreasonable searches without adequate justification. Any form of suspicion should be rooted in objective observations or reported behavior rather than race, ethnicity, or the appearance of the individual.
It is critical to differentiate between reasonable suspicion and probable cause, with the latter being a higher standard required for securing a search or arrest warrant. The Illinois v. Gates case established the 'totality of circumstances' test for determining probable cause, considering all factors rather than fixed criteria.