Officer Smith encounters vehicle matching description of suspected murder car

¶ … Officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle?

As per the facts of the case, Officer Smith was informed of a car of the similar make and color which was involved in the killing of a police officer. The impugned car seems at first sight to have a broken taillight which appears to be covered with color tape. Since the officer feels that the make of the car and the broken taillight may be indicative of it being involved in the death of the officer, the vehicle was pulled up. The subtle point is that the officer remembered this possibility after pulling up the vehicle. The question is if the broken taillight is a reasonable cause for suspicion. It was ruled in Arizona v. Johnson that while in the normal circumstances the police ought to have a warrant to make a search and seizure, "that procedure cannot be followed where swift action based upon on-the-spot observations of the officer on the beat is required." (Legal Information Institute, 2012a)

Assuming that the officer has no suspicion of the vehicle being involved in the murder of the officer, still a broken taillight will normally bring the suspicion of an accident, and the police officer can stop the vehicle to confirm the details. Reasonable suspicion must exist before the stopping of the vehicle and search. It was held that where an officer suspects someone to appear to be in a suspicious situation the officer's conduct would not violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable searches and seizures. (Citelighter, 2012) Doing so was a process of the duty and it is further observed that in the context of a vehicular stop for a minor traffic infraction, an officer can also conduct a pat-down search of a passenger. (Legal Information Institute, 2012a)

2. As the "pat-down" of the driver legal?

One of the grounds for a pat down search is where the officer has the ground that the officer had cause to believe that the suspects were acting in a manner that showed interrogation was warranted, and secondly the officer, for his own protection, had the "right to pat down their outer clothing having reasonable cause to believe that they might be armed." (Legal Information Institute, 2012a) In this case it was an investigatory "stop" and the person was actually searched by the outer clothing for weapons. Thus the officer was within her rights for her own protection and therefore taking into consideration that she suspected the driver of having been involved in a murder the pat down is not illegal. That no weapon was recovered from the person is of no consequence.

3. Did exigent circumstances exist for Officer Smith to give chase to this vehicle?