Which of the following actions could be justified by reasonable suspicion?

The action of detaining a person for questioning based on specific facts falls under the concept of reasonable suspicion, which is a legal standard used in law enforcement. Reasonable suspicion is grounded in specific and articulable facts that lead an officer to believe that a person may be involved in criminal activity. This standard is less demanding than probable cause and allows officers to briefly detain and question individuals to investigate potential wrongdoing without needing to establish strong evidence for an arrest.

In this context, when an officer observes behavior or circumstances that are indicative of criminal activity—such as a person acting suspiciously in a high-crime area—they can initiate a brief stop to inquire further. This action is supported by the legal framework that balances the need for effective law enforcement with individuals’ rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

In contrast, the other choices involve higher legal thresholds. Searching a vehicle without consent typically requires probable cause, as does arresting someone without probable cause, which is not permissible under the Fourth Amendment. Obtaining a warrant to search premises involves demonstrating probable cause to a judge, which is a more stringent requirement than reasonable suspicion. Thus, the option of detaining a person for questioning based on specific facts accurately reflects the application of reasonable suspicion in law enforcement practices.