Stops and Frisks
Background
Generally police have the right to make limited contact with citizens that is short of arrest. The standard for this contact varies from jurisidiction to jurisdiction.
United States
In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) the United States Supreme Court stated that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures did not restrict a police officer's right to make a limited investigatory stop even though the officer did not have probable cause necessary to effect and arrest. The Court held that when a citizen was stopped by a police officer a "stop" had occured for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. However, because the intrusion was less than a full blown arrest, a lower standard of "reasonable suspicision" was required before an officer could make such a stop.
Reasonable suspicion was defined as "specific and articulable facts which taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant" the logical conclusion that "criminal activity is afoot". <Ref> Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
State Constitutions
Some states provide for additional protections against unwarrante police intrusion. For instance, in New York, the Supreme Court has concluded that the State Constitution provides heightened scrutiny for stops and frisks.
