Which court case prohibits randomly stopping a vehicle?

Which court case prohibits randomly stopping a vehicle?

• A. Terry v. Ohio
• B. Miranda v. Arizona
• C. Delaware v. Prouse (1979)
• D. Katz v. United States

Answer: (C)

Stopping a vehicle without individualized justification violates the Fourth Amendment because a traffic stop is a seizure, and its reasonableness hinges on specific justification rather than a blanket policy of stopping drivers at random. Delaware v. Prouse established that police may not randomly stop motorists solely to check licenses and registrations; there must be some individualized basis for the stop, such as a traffic violation or reasonable suspicion of illegal activity. This case clarifies that generic, non-specific stops fail the requirement of reasonable suspicion for detentions of motorists. The other options involve different Fourth Amendment issues: Terry v. Ohio addresses stops based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity for a stop-and-frisk of a person, Miranda v. Arizona concerns interrogation rights, and Katz v. United States deals with privacy expectations.

Stopping a vehicle without individualized justification violates the Fourth Amendment because a traffic stop is a seizure, and its reasonableness hinges on specific justification rather than a blanket policy of stopping drivers at random. Delaware v. Prouse established that police may not randomly stop motorists solely to check licenses and registrations; there must be some individualized basis for the stop, such as a traffic violation or reasonable suspicion of illegal activity. This case clarifies that generic, non-specific stops fail the requirement of reasonable suspicion for detentions of motorists. The other options involve different Fourth Amendment issues: Terry v. Ohio addresses stops based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity for a stop-and-frisk of a person, Miranda v. Arizona concerns interrogation rights, and Katz v. United States deals with privacy expectations.