Illinois v. Wardlow

Where officers have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot, they may conduct a brief, investigatory stop. There must exist at least a minimal level of objective justification for the stop. The Court held that an individual’s presence in a “high crime area,” standing alone, is not enough to support reasonable suspicion. However, a location’s characteristics are worthy of evaluation. When coupled with the defendant’s unprovoked flight, the officers’ aroused suspicion became reasonable. An individual has a right to ignore officers and go about his business. However, the Court stated that unprovoked flight is the exact opposite of “going about one’s business.”