Under what conditions can an officer perform a stop and frisk?

An officer can perform a stop and frisk when there is reasonable suspicion that the individual may be armed and dangerous. This standard, established in the landmark Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, allows law enforcement to ensure their own safety and the safety of others when they have specific and articulable facts leading them to believe the person might be carrying a weapon. Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause and is based on the officer’s observations, experience, and the specific context of the situation.

In contrast, probable cause is required for an arrest and involves a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime, which is not always necessary for a stop and frisk. Consent from the individual can allow for voluntary interactions with law enforcement, but it is not a requirement for a stop and frisk. Lastly, performing a stop and frisk without any suspicion would violate the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, making it unlawful.