The justification for a frisk during a stop is based on what standard?

The justification for a frisk during a stop is grounded in the standard of reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed or poses a danger. This legal standard is derived from the U.S. Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, which established that if a law enforcement officer has a reasonable suspicion that an individual is involved in criminal activity and that they may be armed, the officer is permitted to conduct a limited pat-down of the individual’s outer clothing.

This limited search is intended to ensure the officer's safety and the safety of others, allowing them to ascertain whether the person has a weapon without requiring probable cause for an arrest. This standard balances the need for effective law enforcement with the protection of individual rights under the Fourth Amendment, ensuring that police have the ability to conduct safety checks while respecting the privacy of citizens.

The other options do not meet the legal threshold for conducting a frisk. Probable cause requires a higher level of certainty than reasonable suspicion and is normally associated with arrests rather than temporary stops. A mere hunch lacks the reasonable basis necessary to justify a frisk, and visual evidence of a weapon would typically warrant more immediate action than a frisk, such as securing the individual outright. Thus, the correct answer aligns with the established guidelines surrounding police procedures during encounters