Answer :
Final answer:
The court analyzes a totality of the circumstances when determining both probable cause and reasonable suspicion, making the statement true. This approach was solidified in cases like Illinois v. Gates for probable cause and Terry v. Ohio for reasonable suspicion. Both standards require a thorough consideration of surrounding factors.
Explanation:
Understanding Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion
The statement that the court will analyze a totality of the circumstances when determining probable cause and reasonable suspicion is True.
In legal contexts, particularly under the Fourth Amendment, courts use the "totality of the circumstances" test to assess the presence of probable cause when issuing search warrants or making arrests. This was established in the landmark case of Illinois v. Gates (1983), where the Supreme Court affirmed the necessity of evaluating all relevant circumstances surrounding a particular situation, instead of relying solely on a list of factors.
For instance, probable cause is the standard of proof required for a search warrant or arrest, meaning law enforcement must show a reasonable basis for believing that a crime has been committed. On the other hand, reasonable suspicion, established in Terry v. Ohio (1968), is a lower threshold, allowing officers to stop and frisk individuals based on a belief that they may be involved in criminal activity. Hence, both concepts require a comprehensive evaluation of the situation, supporting the idea that judges analyze the totality of the circumstances.
Learn more about probable cause and reasonable suspicion here:
https://brainly.com/question/42550041
