Various Factors

Various Factors which, when taken individually or in combination, help contribute to justifying a detention.

In General

In General:  Such factors include, but are not limited to, the following (see above and below):

• Whether the suspect resembles a wanted person.
• The suspect is contacted in a wanted vehicle.
• The suspect appears intoxicated or injured.
• The suspect's suspicious actions.
• The suspect's erratic or evasive driving, or other suspicious actions.
• The officer's prior knowledge of criminal activity by the suspect.
• The suspect's demeanor and/or reaction to seeing the officer.
• The suspect's nervousness, belligerence, etc.
• The suspect's evasive replies to questions.
• The time of day.
• Criminal history of the area. (E.g., a "high narcotics area.")
• The proximity to a recent, or a series of crimes.
• The officer's expertise, training and/or experience for the type of crime suspected.
• The suspect's actions consistent with common patterns for the type of crime suspected.
• Informant information.

A 'High Crime' or 'High Narcotics' Area

A "High Crime" or "High Narcotics" Area:

Although being in a so-called "high crime" or "high narcotics activity" area is a factor to be considered; "(a)n ‘officer's assertion that the location lay in a "high crime" area does not (by itself) elevate . . . facts into a reasonable suspicion of criminality. The "high crime area" factor is not an "activity" of an individual. Many citizens of this state are forced to live in areas that have "high crime" rates or they come to these areas to shop, work, play, transact business, or visit relatives or friends. The spectrum of legitimate human behavior occurs every day in so-called high crime areas. . . .'" (Italics added; People v. Pitts (2004) 117 Cal.App.4^th 881, 887; quoting People v. Loewen (1983) 35 Cal.3^rd 117, 124; and People v. Bower (1979) 24 Cal.3^rd 638, 546.)

"(T)he time and location of an encounter are insufficient by themselves to cast reasonable suspicion on an individual." (People v. Medina (2003) 110 Cal.App.4^th 171, 177; noting that neither the "nighttime factor" nor the "high crime area factor" are "activities" by a person sought to be detained.)

However, note that the United States Supreme Court has held that a subject's flight on foot from the police when it occurs in a so-called "high narcotics area" is sufficient in itself to justify a temporary detention. (Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) 528 U.S. 119 [145 L.Ed.2^nd 570]; see "Flight" under "Consensual Encounters," above.)