Connection lost
Server error
United States v. Arvizu Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A border patrol agent stopped a minivan based on a series of individually innocent but collectively suspicious factors. The Supreme Court upheld the stop, reinforcing that courts must evaluate reasonable suspicion based on the “totality of the circumstances,” not by dissecting each factor in isolation.
Legal Significance: This case strongly reaffirms the “totality of the circumstances” standard for reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment. It explicitly rejects a “divide-and-conquer” analysis where courts dismiss individual factors that could have an innocent explanation, emphasizing deference to officer experience and training.
United States v. Arvizu Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
A U.S. Border Patrol agent, Clinton Stoddard, was working near a checkpoint in a remote area of Arizona known for smuggling. A sensor indicated a vehicle was traveling on an unpaved back road often used to circumvent the checkpoint, at a time corresponding with the agents’ shift change. Stoddard observed an approaching minivan, a vehicle type he knew smugglers used. The driver, Ralph Arvizu, slowed considerably, appeared rigid, and avoided eye contact. Stoddard noticed the children in the back seat had their knees raised high, suggesting cargo was on the floor. As Stoddard followed, the children began waving in a strange, mechanical manner for several minutes. The driver then made an abrupt turn onto the last road that would allow him to avoid the checkpoint. A registration check revealed the van was registered to an address in a notorious smuggling area. Based on this combination of factors, Stoddard stopped the vehicle. A subsequent search, to which Arvizu consented, revealed over 100 pounds of marijuana.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the border patrol agent have reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop of the defendant’s vehicle based on the totality of the circumstances, consistent with the Fourth Amendment?
Yes. The agent had reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle. The Court Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did the border patrol agent have reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop of the defendant’s vehicle based on the totality of the circumstances, consistent with the Fourth Amendment?
Conclusion
This case serves as a crucial precedent reinforcing the flexible, fact-specific nature Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation
Legal Rule
To determine if an officer has reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident,
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, holding that its methodology was Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat n
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Courts must use a “totality of the circumstances” test to determine