%20(Email%20Header)-.png)
%20(Email%20Header)-.png)
Illegal Stops
Introduction
Many Criminal Cases begin with a stop that should not have happened.
​
An illegal stop is not a minor procedural issue. It is a Constitutional Violation that can undermine everything that follows. When police stop someone without the required legal justification, evidence discovered afterward may be excluded, even if it appears incriminating.
​
Understanding how stops are evaluated explains why defense strategy often begins with the very first moment of police contact.
What Makes a Stop Legal
To stop a person or vehicle, police must have legal justification.
​
In most cases, that justification is reasonable suspicion. Officers must be able to point to specific and articulable facts suggesting criminal activity or a traffic violation. A hunch or generalized concern is not enough.
​
The justification must exist at the moment the stop occurs. Information discovered afterward cannot be used to retroactively justify the stop.
​
This standard is explained in more detail on the Probable Cause vs Reasonable Suspicion page.
Traffic Stops Are Seizures
A traffic stop is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
​
Even brief stops trigger constitutional protections. Police may detain a driver only for the time reasonably necessary to address the reason for the stop. Expanding the stop requires additional legal justification.
​
In real cases, disputes often arise over whether a traffic violation actually occurred or whether the stop was prolonged without lawful basis.
Stops Based on Minor or Claimed Violations
Many stops are justified by alleged minor violations.
​
Defense review frequently reveals that the claimed violation is unsupported by video or inconsistent with the law. In other cases, the violation exists but does not justify the scope or duration of the stop that followed.
​
Small discrepancies in how a stop is described versus what actually occurred often become critical in suppression litigation.
Pretextual Stops and Their Limits
Police are permitted to make pretextual stops for legitimate traffic violations, even if their true interest lies elsewhere.
​
However, the stop must still be lawful. The violation must actually exist, and the detention must remain tied to the purpose of the stop. Officers may not use a minor violation as a justification to conduct unrelated investigations without additional legal basis.
​
This is where illegal stops often occur.
Expansion of Stops and Questioning
One of the most common problems arises when stops are expanded.
​
Additional questioning, searches, or delays require independent justification. Without it, continued detention may become unlawful. Courts look closely at how long the stop lasted and what occurred during that time.
​
These issues frequently overlap with Searches and Seizures, the Right to Remain Silent, and Miranda Rights.
What Happens When a Stop Is Illegal
If a stop is illegal, evidence obtained as a result may be Excluded.
​
This includes physical evidence, statements, and observations that flow from the unlawful stop. The goal is not to excuse wrongdoing but to enforce constitutional limits on police authority.
​
Suppression of evidence can significantly weaken or eliminate the state’s case.
How Illegal Stops Shape Criminal Defense
Illegal stops are often the most effective point of challenge in a criminal case.
​
They occur early. They affect everything that follows. Defense strategy focuses on reconstructing the stop using video, dispatch records, and timing analysis to determine whether legal standards were met.
​
Because these encounters happen quickly, accuracy matters more than conclusions.
Practical Takeaway
Police must have legal justification to stop a person or vehicle.
​
When a stop lacks reasonable suspicion or is improperly expanded, constitutional protections are violated and evidence may be excluded. Understanding illegal stops explains why criminal defense focuses so heavily on the first moments of police contact.
​
That is often where the case is won or lost.