Skip to main content
-
In the following example, determine if the officer has probable cause. Officer Johnson arrives at Simpson's Jewelry store moments after it's been robbed. He sees broken glass inside the store. A man claiming to be Simpson, the owner, is on the scene. He holds what look like keys to the store and seems distressed. He tells Johnson that a man, approximately 6'5" tall and weighing over 300 pounds, held up the store at gunpoint and escaped with rings and watches in a small brown paper bag. A few minutes later, less than a mile away from the jewelry store, Officer Johnson pulls a car over for speeding. The driver matches the description of the robber, and on the seat next to him is a small brown paper bag and a couple of watches with the price tags attached. Does the officer have probable cause to search the man and the car? If so, what facts support probable cause? Same situation as above. Officer Johnson contacts the store owner who indicates his store has been robbed by gunpoint. Officer Johnson walks around the corner and sees a man fitting the description provided by the victim. He doesn’t see a brown bag or jewelry but notices the man is making furtive action, the man is trying to hide something in his waist band. Does the officer have reasonable suspicion or probable cause? Support your position using the key terms and concepts above.
-
Using the scenarios about, provide how you used totality of circumstances, common sense, legal, but suspicious activities, and multiple incriminating circumstances to determine probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
-
Officers often use unique circumstance during criminal investigations to develop probable cause to obtain a search warrant or make an arrest. The court will use an officers training and experience. In this critical thinking exercise, you will demonstrate how you use inferences to draw conclusions in your daily life. This is the process officers use (through their education, training, and experience) to develop conclusions to demonstrate probable cause/reasonable suspicion. In this critical thinking exercise, pretend you are an officer and identify a situation where you would use an
inference
to draw a
conclusion
a crime has been committed or an arrest should be made.
-
Making
inferences
is the process of figuring out missing information from information that IS included. Inferences can be made using an officers training, education, and experience, but it must be “articulable” meaning you can explain it, it can’t be a “gut feeling or hunch.” To infer is a thinking process of reading between the lines. Officers can use behaviors, information, intelligence, training, education, and other articulable facts.
-
Conclusions
are the judgments or decisions reached based on information learned. It requires reasoning or deep thinking and observation skills. Drawing conclusions is deeper than an inference. In fact, making inferences helps us draw conclusions.
-
A police officer can arrest a person without an arrest warrant when the person commits an offense in the presence of the officer and the officer has probable cause to believe that a suspect committed a felony. Based on the scenario presented in critical thinking question 6.1, you have the suspect in custody and are making an arrest. Identify what your next steps would be after placing the handcuffs on the suspect. Outline the process from handcuffing to booking, making sure you follow the rights of the arrestee.