U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Drug Courier Profiles and Airport Stops - Is the Sky the Limit?

NCJ Number
79157
Journal
Western New England Law Review Volume: 3 Dated: (1980) Pages: 175-198
Author(s)
M A Constantino; V A Cannavo; A Goldstein
Date Published
1980
Length
24 pages
Annotation
This article analyzes the constitutionallity of stopping people in airports solely because their appearance and behavior correspond to traits listed in a drug courier profile.
Abstract
The propriety of such law enforcement action is viewed from the perspective of the fourth amendment requirements and the standards which have developed in the area of stop-and-frisk. It is contended that while a set of facts may arise which coincide with certain profile characteristics claimed to constitute reasonable suspicion, the drug courier profile in a particular case may not provide the specific and articulable facts that reasonably warrant an investigatory stop. In judging the constitutionality of these profiles, courts should evaluate even minimal intrusions on a persons's freedom by nothing less than the reasonableness requirement of the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment would be appreciably damaged if the validity of a stop could be proven by something less than evidence of reasonable grounds for suspecting a particular person of crime. Due to the potential erosion of fourth amendment protection, it would be unwise to relax the requirements of Terry v. Ohio, which established that the reasonableness of investigatory stops is to be decided on the facts of the case. This premise clearly indicates the link between otherwise innocent behavior and drug-related activity. The claim that the fourth amendment is not implicated by general investigatory steps used at airports sets a dangerous precedent. Without constitutional regulation in this area, an officer's behavior would be unhampered by the constraints of the Constitution while innocent acts associated with air travel could assume a suspicious tint in the eyes of law enforcement officers faced with the problem of narcotics smuggling. A finding such as that of the United States v. Mendenhall, that an airport stop is justified on the basis of a drug courier profile, may trigger the development of similar profiles for other kinds of travel or social behavior. This would diminish the protections against arbitrary governmental interference. A total of 128 footnotes are provided.