Opinion ID: 2445810
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Detective Jordan's Terry Stop

Text: Thomas challenges the police stop, however, because it was conducted by Detective Jordan rather than by Detective Janvier. Thomas contends that when Detective Jordan stopped Thomas and the group Thomas was with, Detective Jordan lacked the reasonable articulable suspicion that was necessary to conduct the stop. Under Terry v. Ohio , [4] an officer is justified in stopping an individual when the officer possesses a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the individual was committing, had committed, or was about to commit a crime. [5] This Court has recognized that an arresting officer is entitled to rely on information relayed to him through official channels and that [t]he arresting officer himself need not be apprised of the underlying circumstances which have risen to a conclusion of probable cause. [6] This Court has held that a police officer may conduct a Terry stop of an individual who matches the description of a suspect provided to the officer either by a reliable informant or over a police radio broadcast. [7] The description relied upon by Detective Jordan was given by Detective Janvier and was broadcast over the police radio. Based on the specific description and location provided, Detective Jordan was justified in stopping Thomas and the other men who also fit the description provided by Detective Janvier's dispatch. Because Detective Jordan would have been able to stop each man fitting the description individually, it was also permissible and reasonable under the circumstances for Detective Jordan to stop them together and conduct a Terry investigation. We hold that Detective Jordan's stop of Thomas was proper because he was justified in relying on the police radio report of Detective Janvier. [8]