The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the officer was justified in suspecting Wardlow was involved in criminal activity, and in investigating further by conducting a brief investigatory stop. This is more than a hunch, less than probable cause - there must be a minimal level of objective justification for making a stop. By itself, a suspect s presence in a high crime area is not enough for a Terry stop. But the characteristics of the area are something officers may consider in deciding whether to stop someone. All by itself, the refusal to cooperate with police is not enough to justify a detention or seizure.
Individuals have the right, when approached by police, to ignore police and go about their business.
Nervous, evasive behavior has always been a factor in determining reasonable suspicion, and unprovoked flight from police is certainly evasive behavior. The Court stopped short of announcing a blanket authorization to stop anyone who flees police. But the Court made clear that while unprovoked flight does not necessarily indicate criminal activity, it is certainly a factor in officers decisions about reasonable suspicion. Although under Terry officers may detain fleeing individuals to resolve ambiguities in their conduct, there is a risk that officers may stop innocent people. If during a brief encounter an officer finds no facts to support probable cause, he must allow the individual to go on his way.