In Whren v. United States (1996) the Supreme Court affirmed that officers could stop vehicles to allay any suspicions even though they have no evidence of criminal behavior. This type of stop is referred to as a ?

pretext stop

Explanation:

The United States Supreme Court in the case Whren v. United States (517 U.S. 806) in 1996 unanimously ruled that officers could pull over vehicles and detains the citizen any traffic offense committed and especially if the citizen is suspected to be involved in a more significant offence. This ruling is in line with the Fourth Amendment.

Therefore this type of stop is referred to as a pretext stop

Pretext stop

Explanation:

A police officer may have reasonable suspicion to stop a driver but actually has some other motivation for the stop. The police officer may believe that a driver is involved in a drug ring and use a minor traffic violation to justify stopping him or her. The law enforcement officer may use the stop as a pretext to search the vehicle for drugs or other evidence of the crime. The United States Supreme Court has held that a pretextual stop is considered a legal stop so long as the traffic stop is legal at its inception ad was supported on an objectively reasonable basis.

The United States Supreme Court in the case Whren v. United States (517 U.S. 806) in 1996 ruled that officers have the right to pull over vehicles and detains the citizen any traffic offense committed and especially if the citizen is suspected to be involved in a more significant offence. This ruling is in line with the Fourth Amendment. This type of stop is referred to as a pretext stop