Editing Education (section)

== US Legal research ==

'''totality of circumstances''' ''put everything together and analyze the whole picture''

reasonable articulable facts

Courts focus on:
#specific
#articulable
#rational inferences

* Do not use "suspicious" when describing the activity. Suspicious is the conclusion based on facts.
* articulate facts that make an activity suspicious

with specific articulable facts, what can a rational officer (or citizen) infer?

Mental checklist:
#What crime do you observe? What crime is about to be committed? Be very specific.
#What facts do I see to support 1?
#Take a step back, and ask yourself, "Is this more than a hunch?"

Note:
#Facts cannot include observations made after the stop.
#Suspicion must be individualized, not general (i.e., "high crime area").
#United States v. Arivizu, 534 US 266 (2002)

References:
*Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1 (1968)
* United States v. Cortez, 449 US 441, 417-18 (1981)
* Ornelas v. United States, 517 US 690 (1996)