00-1519 United States v. Arvizu

Listen to this article

“The Ninth Circuit’s methodology departs sharply from these teachings, and it reached the wrong result in this case. Its evaluation and rejection of certain

factors in isolation from each other does not take into account the “totality of the circumstances,” as this Court’s cases have understood that phrase. The court appeared to believe that each of Stoddard’s observations that was by itself susceptible to an innocent explanation was entitled to no weight. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, however, precludes this sort of divide-and-conquer analysis. And the court’s view that it was necessary to clearly delimit an officer’s consideration of certain factors to reduce troubling uncertainty also runs counter to this Court’s cases and underestimates the reasonable-suspicion standard’s usefulness in guiding officers in the field… Here, it was reasonable for Stoddard to infer from his observations, his vehicle registration check, and his border patrol experience that respondent had set out on a route used by drug smugglers and that he intended to pass through the area during a border patrol shift change; and Stoddard’s assessment of the reactions of respondent and his passengers was entitled to some weight. Although each of the factors alone is susceptible to innocent explanation, and some factors are more probative than others, taken together, they sufficed to form a particularized and objective basis for stopping the vehicle.”

Reversed and remanded.

Local Effect: The decision merely reaffirms

longstanding Fourth Amendment jurisprudence from which the Ninth Circuit departed.

Rehnquist, C.J.

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 232 F.3d 1241, reversed and remanded.