Northern Virginia Criminal Justice Academy (NVCJA) Practice Exam

In a situation of pretextual vehicle stops, what is a common outcome related to evidence suppression?

1. Suppression is usually granted

2. Suppression is denied

3. Evidence is always admissible

4. A case is automatically dismissed

The correct answer is: Suppression is denied

In the context of pretextual vehicle stops, the outcome related to evidence suppression is often that suppression is denied. A pretextual stop occurs when law enforcement officers use a minor traffic violation as a reason to stop a vehicle, but their true motivation is to investigate a more serious offense. Courts generally require that the officer has probable cause for the traffic stop. If the officer can demonstrate that the traffic violation was the genuine reason for the stop, then evidence obtained as a result of the stop is typically considered admissible in court. This principle is rooted in the understanding that as long as the officer had a lawful reason to initiate the stop, the subsequent search and seizure may be justified even if the officer had ulterior motives. Courts are often wary of suppressing evidence simply based on the officer’s intentions when they acted within the law. Thus, in cases involving pretextual stops, suppression of evidence is frequently denied. Other outcomes, such as automatic case dismissal or the idea that evidence is always admissible, do not accurately reflect the nuances involved in legal proceedings regarding traffic stops and evidential gatherings.