What constitutes an officer's reasonable suspicion of criminal activity?

An officer's reasonable suspicion of criminal activity is primarily established through sufficient facts and information. This means that an officer must have a particularized and objective basis for believing that criminal activity is afoot. This basis can include observable behavior, the context of the situation, and the officer's training and experience.

In contrast to just intuition or a gut feeling, reasonable suspicion relies on specific facts that can be articulated and are within the officer's knowledge at the time of the encounter. For example, if an officer observes someone engaging in suspicious behavior, such as looking into car windows in a high-crime area, these facts can lead to reasonable suspicion.

While informed judgment of a judge and witness testimony can be important in various legal procedures, they do not specifically define reasonable suspicion in the context of an officer making an initial assessment of a situation on the street. Police intuition alone is insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion; it needs to be backed up by observable facts or circumstances. Therefore, the emphasis on sufficient facts and information is critical in understanding how reasonable suspicion operates in law enforcement.