Both Nevada law and federal law require that police have reasonable suspicion before they can stop and detain you on suspicion of a crime. This is sometimes called a “Terry Stop” or a “stop and frisk pat down.”
A reasonable suspicion is a sensible and rational impression that you committed a crime. This impression gives law enforcement the Fourth Amendment right to detain you to gather more information.
What gives police reasonable suspicion?
NRS 171.1231 enumerates the three scenarios when Nevada police may stop and detain you based on reasonable suspicion:
- Circumstances reasonably indicate that you committed – or are about to commit – a crime;
- Circumstances reasonably indicate that you violated your parole or probation; or
- Police wish to ascertain your identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding your presence. However, you are not obligated to tell the officer anything but your name.1
When and where can I be detained?
A detainment based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may not last longer than necessary and never longer than 60 minutes. It also cannot extend beyond the location where the detention occurred (unless the police then arrest you).2
The Nevada Supreme Court specified three times when prolonging a traffic stop may be reasonable:
- The encounter is consensual; or
- The circumstances surrounding the stop make the delay reasonable; or
- The initial stop provides additional information of criminal conduct, thereby justifying a further delay.3
When determining whether a delayed stop is reasonable, the Nevada Supreme Court uses “an objective eye in the totality of the circumstances.”4
What are examples?
Five fact patterns that may justify Nevada police stopping and detaining someone on a “reasonable suspicion” include:
- A scantily dressed woman is standing by a truck stop men’s room and talking to the men as they enter. An officer would have reasonable suspicion she is soliciting prostitution.
- A person with a gun and full pockets is standing on a corner known for drug deals. An officer would have a reasonable suspicion he may be selling drugs.
- A masked man is walking by an empty house with a crowbar. An officer would have a reasonable suspicion he may be about to commit burglary.
- A driver repeatedly swerves between lanes. An officer would have reasonable suspicion that the driver may be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
- A woman is wearing an expensive watch that has been reported stolen. An officer would have a reasonable suspicion that she may have stolen the watch.
How is probable cause different?
Nevada police can stop and detain you based on reasonable suspicion. Though in order to arrest you, the police need probable cause. In general, probable cause requires some kind of evidence that is more tangible or citable than mere suspicion.5
For example, swerving may be sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify a DUI traffic stop. However, to arrest you for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances, the police try to gather evidence such as:
- A confession that you were drinking or using drugs;
- Slurred speech, glassy eyes, the smell of alcohol or marijuana, a stumbling demeanor, or other impairments;
- Being unable to follow simple requests such as producing your driver’s license or registration;
- A roadside breath test result that shows an illegal blood/breath alcohol content of 0.08% or higher; and/or
- Failed field sobriety tests (such as the walk-and-turn and one-legged stand).
Learn more about probable cause in Nevada DUI cases.
What if police committed a wrongful detention or arrest?
Police who committed a wrongful detention or false arrest are subject to various legal and disciplinary procedures:
- You can file a police report;
- You can sue the offending peace officers; and/or
- The police department can discipline the arresting officer.
If the police’s misconduct resulted in you getting arrested and charged, you can use that misconduct as a defense to your criminal charges.
See our related article, How to file a complaint against a police officer in Nevada.
Additional Reading
For more in-depth information, refer to the following scholarly articles:
- Reasonable Suspicion and Mere Hunches – Vanderbilt Law Review.
- Reasonable Suspicion: Not Just Based on Training and Professional Experience – North Dakota Law Reviews.
- Reasonable Suspicion Becoming Probable Cause – North Dakota Law Review.
- Race and Reasonable Suspicion – Florida Law Review.
- The High-Crime Area Question: Requiring Verifiable and Quantifiable Evidence for Fourth Amendment Reasonable Suspicion Analysis – American University Law Review.
See our related articles on unreasonable searches and seizures, DUI checkpoints, blood alcohol tests (necessary for drug testing in DUI cases), and when police can pull you over in Nevada.
Legal References
- NRS 171.1231.
- NRS 171.123. Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, (2004) 542 U.S. 177 (2004). Terry v. Ohio (1968) 392 U.S. 1. U.S v. Cortez, (1981) 449 U.S. 411 (“The process does not deal with hard certainties, but with probabilities. Long before the law of probabilities was articulated as such, practical people formulated certain commonsense conclusions about human behavior; jurors as factfinders are permitted to do the same — and so are law enforcement officers. Finally, the evidence thus collected must be seen and weighed not in terms of library analysis by scholars, but as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement.”).
- State v. Beckman (2013) 129 Nev. 481.
- State v. Lisenbee (2000) 116 Nev. 1124.
- NRS 171.1231.
