Which case justifies stops based on BOLOs, flyers, or bulletins?

• A. Hensley
• B. McAnnis v. State
• C. Graham v. Connor
• D. Brinegar v. United States

Answer: (B)

Stops can be justified when an officer relies on credible information circulated to law enforcement and the public, such as a BOLO, flyer, or bulletin, and the person encountered matches the description with other factors that create reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity. McAnnis v. State supports that approach, holding that a stop can be justified on the basis of a BOLO or similar alert if the observed individual corresponds to the alert and there are articulable facts beyond the description that point to possible criminal involvement, with the stop kept brief and non-intrusive while identification or investigation proceeds. The idea is not just the description itself, but whether the overall circumstances give the officer a reasonable basis to suspect unlawful activity at that moment. Other cases address different Fourth Amendment issues—such as use of force (Graham v. Connor) or the requirement of probable cause for searches or arrests (Brinegar v. United States)—and do not establish that a bulletin alone can justify a stop.