Illinois v. Wardlow
- Decided
- January 19, 2000
- Docket
- 98-1036
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,162 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that the area’s propensity toward criminal activity is one factor to be considered in determining the existence of reasonable suspicion — State v. Nicholson (2006)
- recognizing that nervous, evasive behavior such as flight is a pertinent factor in determining reasonable suspicion — Commonwealth v. Freeman (2000)
- holding that the defendant’s unprovoked flight from police officers in a high crime area created reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop — United States v. Hauk (2005)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*121] CHIEF Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court.
Respondent Wardlow fled upon seeing police officers patrolling an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking. Two of the officers caught up with him, stopped him, and conducted a protective patdown search for weapons. Discovering a .38-caliber handgun, the officers arrested Wardlow. We hold that the officers’ stop did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
On September 9, 1995, Officers Nolan and Harvey were working as uniformed officers in the special operations section of the Chicago Police Department. The officers were driving the last car of a four-car caravan converging on an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking in order to investigate drug transactions. The officers were traveling together because they expected to find a crowd of people in the area, including lookouts and customers.
Cite this
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.