What is the primary consideration in allowing a frisk during an investigative stop?

The primary consideration in allowing a frisk during an investigative stop is based on reasonable suspicion regarding the suspect's potential danger. This principle stems from the need to ensure officer safety and the safety of others in the vicinity during an investigative stop. When an officer has a reasonable belief that a person may be armed and dangerous, they are justified in conducting a limited pat-down of the person's outer clothing to check for weapons. This procedure is not meant to be a full search, but rather a precaution to mitigate potential threats to the officer or public safety.

The requirement of reasonable suspicion recognizes the balance between individual rights and the need for law enforcement to protect themselves while performing their duties. It allows officers to act swiftly when they perceive a risk, providing a legal framework for the frisk. This standard is rooted in legal precedents, particularly the landmark Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, which established the legality of the stop-and-frisk procedure based on reasonable suspicion.

Factors such as the suspect's prior criminal history, the presence of the public, or the existence of an arrest warrant, while relevant in some contexts, do not in themselves establish the immediate basis for a frisk. The essence of the frisk is the officer's assessment of danger at that moment, guided by reasonable