POLS 4720 Lecture 8: 8
5 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
As mentioned previously, the main issue that now confronts the U.S. Supreme Court is
whether the Fourth Amendment requires an officer who received information from an
anonymous tip concerning a reckless driver to witness the reckless driving before stopping the
vehicle. The petitioner, Navarette, contends that a traffic stop on the sole basis of an anonymous
tip without police corroboration constitutes an unreasonable seizure, directly prohibited by the
Fourth Amendment (Brief of Petitioner at 8). Specifically, Navarette argues that an anonymous
tip alone does not give police the “reasonable suspicion” necessary to justify a stop, as
established in Terry v. Ohio (1968), and relies heavily on the Court’s decision in Florida v. J.L.
(2000) (Brief of Petitioner at 8). As will be discussed later in greater detail, the police, in J.L.,
received an anonymous tip that a black male in a plaid shirt standing by a bus stop was carrying
a gun. Officers identified the suspect on the basis of the tip and upon frisking him, found a
firearm on his person. The Court, however, invalidated the search, stating that “reasonable
suspicion” requires that a tip be “reliable in its assertion of illegality,” not just in the accuracy of
a simple description (Florida v. J.L. 2000, 272).
Navarette asserts that the simple description of his truck was, likewise, not enough to
establish the reasonable suspicion required to make the traffic stop (Brief of Petitioner at 9). The
state of California, however, contends that the government’s interest in protecting public safety
is compelling enough to allow police to stop the vehicle without corroboration, as waiting for
confirmation of reckless driving could result in fatal injuries to drivers and pedestrians (Brief of
Respondent at 5-6).
The respondent notes that reasonable suspicion is determined by the totality of the
circumstances, as established in Illinois v. Gates (1983), and that governmental interest in public
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
The petitioner, navarette, contends that a traffic stop on the sole basis of an anonymous tip without police corroboration constitutes an unreasonable seizure, directly prohibited by the. As will be discussed later in greater detail, the police, in j. l. , received an anonymous tip that a black male in a plaid shirt standing by a bus stop was carrying a gun. Officers identified the suspect on the basis of the tip and upon frisking him, found a firearm on his person. The court, however, invalidated the search, stating that reasonable suspicion requires that a tip be reliable in its assertion of illegality, not just in the accuracy of a simple description (florida v. j. l. Navarette asserts that the simple description of his truck was, likewise, not enough to establish the reasonable suspicion required to make the traffic stop (brief of petitioner at 9).
