HomeCase briefs › Criminal Procedure

Illinois v. Wardlow

Supreme Court of the United States · 2000 · Criminal Procedure
Criminal ProcedureFourth Amendmentreasonable suspicionflighthigh crime areaTerryreasonable suspicioninvestigatory stop

Facts

Chicago police officers in a four-car caravan were converging on an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking to investigate drug transactions. Officer Nolan saw Wardlow standing next to a building holding an opaque bag; Wardlow looked in the officers' direction and fled. Two officers pursued, cornered, and stopped him, and Nolan immediately conducted a protective patdown search for weapons based on his experience that weapons were common near narcotics transactions. When Nolan felt a heavy, hard object in the bag shaped like a gun, he opened it, found a loaded .38-caliber handgun, and Wardlow was arrested.

Issue

Whether police officers had reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment to make a Terry stop when Wardlow engaged in unprovoked flight after noticing police officers in an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking.

Rule

An officer may conduct a brief investigatory stop when the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. Presence in an area of expected criminal activity, standing alone, is not enough, but a location's characteristics are relevant contextual considerations, and unprovoked headlong flight is a pertinent form of nervous, evasive behavior that can contribute to reasonable suspicion under the totality of the circumstances.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Uniformed officers in Albuquerque drove slowly through a block they had been assigned to patrol because it was known for repeated street-level heroin sales. When Devin Cole saw the marked patrol car, he immediately turned and sprinted through a nearby alley without being addressed or signaled to stop. The officers chased and detained him.

Was the stop most likely lawful under the Fourth Amendment?

Explanation. A brief investigatory stop is permitted when officers have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. Presence in a high-crime area is not enough by itself, but it is a relevant contextual factor. Unprovoked headlong flight is a pertinent form of nervous, evasive behavior and, combined with the location, supports reasonable suspicion.