The standard of reasonableness for stops is best described as

The standard of reasonableness for stops is best described as

• A. Reasonable suspicion is the same as probable cause
• B. It requires concrete evidence beyond a doubt
• C. It is a lower standard than probable cause, requiring specific facts indicating possible criminal activity
• D. It can be based on a hunch alone

Answer: (C)

The key idea is that stops are allowed when there is reasonable suspicion: a threshold below probable cause but above a mere hunch. Reasonable suspicion means there are specific, articulable facts that, taken with rational inferences, indicate that criminal activity may be afoot. It isn’t based on a guess, and it isn’t as strong as probable cause or require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s why the best description is that the standard is lower than probable cause and rests on specific facts suggesting possible criminal activity. The other statements overstate or mischaracterize the standard: it isn’t the same as probable cause, it isn’t proven beyond a doubt, and it can’t be based on a mere hunch.

The key idea is that stops are allowed when there is reasonable suspicion: a threshold below probable cause but above a mere hunch. Reasonable suspicion means there are specific, articulable facts that, taken with rational inferences, indicate that criminal activity may be afoot. It isn’t based on a guess, and it isn’t as strong as probable cause or require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

That’s why the best description is that the standard is lower than probable cause and rests on specific facts suggesting possible criminal activity. The other statements overstate or mischaracterize the standard: it isn’t the same as probable cause, it isn’t proven beyond a doubt, and it can’t be based on a mere hunch.