What should be the response of officers when determining if they can conduct a frisk?

When determining whether officers can conduct a frisk, they must establish reasonable suspicion. This standard is lower than probable cause and is the crucial threshold needed to justify a brief, investigatory stop and a frisk for weapons. Reasonable suspicion arises from specific and articulable facts that suggest a person may be involved in criminal activity or may be armed and dangerous.

Officers rely on their training and experience to identify threats or criminal behavior, enabling them to act to ensure their safety and the safety of others. This is in line with the principles established in the Terry v. Ohio case, which allows law enforcement officers to conduct a limited search of a person if they suspect that the person may be armed and dangerous, provided they have reasonable suspicion for such belief.

While probable cause is necessary for arrests, it is not the correct standard for conducting a frisk. Assessing consent is generally not applicable in situations where a frisk is warranted based on reasonable suspicion. Evaluating immediate threat might be part of the broader context in which a frisk is considered, but it does not serve as the formal basis for justifying the action.