Considering the fact that there was enough information about the criminal as well as the crime he was about to and had committed there was enough probable cause to stop his vehicle. The responsibility of the police is to ensure the safety of the public and the aforementioned action was t aken so as to make sure that the safety of the public was not ignored (Soglin, Price and Romano, 2007). The description that had been provided about the criminal as well as the appearance of his car was found to be exact and he also carried out certain actions that are done so by people who are guilty of crime. The exchange of bags, the way he deals with the other person, his attempts to get rid of the surveillance etc were all somehow directing the police towards believing the fact that he was the real criminal.
The officers have the freedom to detain public if they are considered as having the propensity of being a criminal. They do not violate any law what so ever by merely approaching individuals in public and that too because they have reasons to consider them a criminal. Even when officers have no foundation for deducing a scrupulous personage, they have been given the authority to as questions, as well as for credentials, and appeal to assent to investigate their person or property. Also, it is to be taken into consideration that the police have the liberty to carry out a warrant less search of any part of a means of transportation as long as they have plausible cause to suppose that the object they are trying to find is present in the car. And, "this includes compartments and containers within the vehicle, including the trunk and glove compartment. If a search and seizure without warrant are made upon probable cause, the search and seizure are valid. When officers have probable cause to believe that an automobile contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment does not require them to obtain a warrant prior to searching the car for and seizing the contraband" (Fleck, 1999).
Detaining is allowed even if the person is not under arrest on the basis that there is enough proof of him being stopped and searched. They can also be asked to step out of the car because of the fact that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America allows them to. Hence the governmental authorities have the power to stop general public (only if they have reasons to believe them as criminals) and to ask them to step out for questioning. If there is no reason to believe or perceive him or her as a criminal, then the person has the power to walk away from the detention or to even not answer the questions posed by the police at him (Supreme Court Upholds Right of Passengers, 2007).
The question of searching a car without warrant arises here. This is also allowed under the Fourth Amendment but even this action required the presence of enough