What key factor differentiates reasonable suspicion from probable cause?

Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are both legal standards used in law enforcement to justify actions such as stops and arrests, but they differ primarily in the amount of evidence required to meet each standard.

Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard that allows law enforcement officers to briefly detain an individual for questioning or to conduct a search based on specific and articulable facts that suggest criminal activity may be afoot. It does not require overwhelming evidence; rather, it relies on the officer's training, experience, and the totality of the circumstances to establish a belief that a crime may be occurring or will occur.

In contrast, probable cause necessitates a higher level of certainty and evidentiary support that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed. This means that the evidence required must be more substantial, allowing for an arrest or a search warrant to be issued. Thus, the distinction lies in the amount of evidence: reasonable suspicion relies on less concrete evidence, while probable cause demands a stronger factual basis.

The other factors mentioned do not fundamentally change the nature of the legal standards; the severity of the crime, the identity of the suspect, and the time of day can influence the application of these standards, but they are not the defining