MCOLES State Licensing Practice Exam

In People v. Parham, what must the officer be able to articulate?

1. Reason for stopping an individual

2. Reason for conducting a search without consent

3. Evidence observed before making an arrest

4. Reason for calling for backup

The correct answer is: Reason for stopping an individual

In the case of People v. Parham, the key factor revolves around an officer's ability to articulate a clear and reasonable rationale for stopping an individual. This requirement is rooted in the need to ensure that law enforcement actions are grounded in articulable facts rather than arbitrary decision-making. When an officer conducts a stop, they must be able to convey specific observations or circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a law is being violated or that the individual poses a potential threat. This principle aligns with the broader legal standards of "reasonable suspicion" in police work, ensuring that stops are legally justified and protecting individual rights against unlawful detention. While there are important considerations regarding searches without consent, the necessity for evidence prior to arrest, and the reasons for calling for backup, these elements are not the primary focus of this particular case. The emphasis on articulating a reason for stopping an individual reflects the foundational principles governing lawful police stops and interactions with the public.