Understanding the Legitimacy of Arrests: A Jackson Law Guide

At Jackson Law, we believe in empowering our clients with the knowledge needed to navigate the complexities of the legal system. This includes understanding the circumstances under which a law enforcement officer is lawfully allowed to make an arrest, and recognizing the indicators that such an arrest has indeed occurred.

An arrest takes place when a police officer takes an individual into custody, effectively removing their freedom to leave the presence of the officer. The moment a person can no longer depart willingly from the officer’s presence, an arrest is considered to have been made. Under the protection of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a legitimate arrest requires “probable cause,” a standard that is met when the police have substantial reasons to believe that a person has engaged in criminal activity.

The concept of probable cause serves as a safeguard against the arbitrary deprivation of personal freedoms. It acts as a barrier against the unfounded detention of individuals, a practice that is unfortunately more common in some regions outside the United States. The framework for establishing probable cause is grounded in objectively verifiable facts:

• Police officers must demonstrate probable cause through clear, factual circumstances which support the belief that a person is responsible for committing a crime. It is insufficient for an officer to claim probable cause based merely on a personal intuition or “gut feeling” about someone’s illicit involvement.
• While police may initially determine that they have enough evidence to support probable cause, ultimately, it is the judiciary—that is, judges—who have the final say in affirming its existence. If upon review, a judge discerns that the evidence does not meet the standard, then probable cause is deemed not to have been present, regardless of the officer’s original conviction.
• Interestingly, an arrest can still be lawful if it was founded on probable cause, even if subsequent investigations reveal the accused to be innocent. The existence of probable cause at the time of the arrest protects law enforcement from legal backlash, such as a lawsuit for false arrest, in instances where the charges are later dropped or the accused is exonerated.

These guiding principles, however, leave unresolved the pivotal question: What quantity and quality of information do police need to secure a judge’s approval for an arrest warrant, or to proceed with an arrest without a warrant? Generally, the standard for probable cause lies somewhere between a slight suspicion and the level of certainty required for a criminal conviction. The necessity to define probable cause is a complex undertaking, as the Fourth Amendment itself does not concretely specify what constitutes sufficient grounds for an arrest. Judges are tasked with determining the contours of probable cause, relying on:

• their interpretation of the original intentions behind the Fourth Amendment’s language,
• precedents set in prior legal cases under analogous circumstances, and
• their own balance of considerations regarding police authority and the rights of individuals accused of crimes.

Judges continually contribute to the evolving definition of probable cause through their decisions on the issuance of warrants and their rulings in cases where the legitimacy of an arrest is in contention.

To discuss the particulars of your case or if you have any questions regarding the legality of an arrest, please reach out to the dedicated legal team at Jackson Law at 650-587-8556. We’re here to protect your rights and guide you through the intricacies of the criminal justice process.