What must law enforcement officers demonstrate to justify a vehicle stop?

To justify a vehicle stop, law enforcement officers must demonstrate reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. This standard requires that officers have specific and articulable facts that lead them to believe that a person is involved in criminal activity. It is a lower threshold than probable cause, which is needed for more intrusive actions such as arrests or searches.

Reasonable suspicion allows officers to engage in a brief investigatory stop, often referred to as a stop-and-frisk or Terry stop. This principle stems from the landmark Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, which established that officers can act on their instincts and experience when they observe behavior that raises suspicion.

In contrast, clear evidence of wrongdoing goes beyond what is required for a mere stop, as it typically pertains to proof that criminal activity has already occurred. A warrant for a driver's arrest is only necessary for making an arrest, not for simply stopping a vehicle. Lastly, while a traffic violation can certainly justify a stop, reasonable suspicion encompasses a broader range of situations where a stop may be warranted, including but not limited to various forms of suspicious behavior that might not necessarily involve a clear-cut violation of traffic laws.