What is the standard for reasonable suspicion in law enforcement?

Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard used in law enforcement that provides officers with the authority to stop and briefly detain an individual for questioning when they have specific, articulable facts that suggest the person may be involved in criminal activity. The requirement that this evidence be "reasonably articulated" means that officers must be able to explain the basis for their suspicion in a way that is understandable and justifiable.

This standard is less demanding than "probable cause," which requires a higher level of certainty and is necessary for obtaining warrants or making arrests. Reasonable suspicion allows officers to act on their observations and experiences while ensuring that their actions are grounded in concrete facts, as opposed to mere hunches or intuitions.

The other options do not accurately reflect the legal requirements for reasonable suspicion; for example, intuition alone is not sufficient, nor is mere circumstantial evidence without further specifics. Clear and convincing evidence surpasses the threshold for reasonable suspicion, making it inapplicable to this standard. Thus, the emphasis on evidence that can be reasonably articulated captures the essence of what constitutes reasonable suspicion in law enforcement.