THE ISSUE OF POLICE DISCRETION IN AUTOMOBILE STOPS ARISES FROM A DELAWARE CASE IN WHICH THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE OBTAINED DURING A RANDOM STOP OF THE DEFENDANT'S CAR WAS AFFIRMED. THE COURT RULED THAT BEFORE SINGLING OUT AN AUTOMOBILE FOR SEARCH THE POLICE MUST HAVE SPECIFIC FACTS TO WARRANT THE SEARCH. 'ABSOLUTE DISCRETION' (THE RIGHT OF THE POLICE OFFICER TO STOP WHOMEVER HE PLEASES) WITHOUT PRIOR EXISTING EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY THE STOP WAS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL. STUDIES OF POLICE DECISIONS INDICATE THAT STOPS OF THIS TYPE ARE DONE DISPROPORTIONATELY FOR MEMBERS OF CERTAIN SOCIAL GROUPS (E.G., YOUNG BLACK MALES). POLICE STOPS ARE OFTEN BASED ON HUNCHES AND INTUITIVE FEELINGS, ALLOWING THE PERSONAL PREJUDICES OF THE POLICE OFFICER TO DETERMINE WHO WILL BE STOPPED. THE POLICE HAVE NOT DONE THE KIND OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH NEEDED TO CONFIRM OR DISCONFIRM THEIR HUNCHES, AND THE STATE OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE AREA IS LACKING. RESEARCH IS NECESSARY REGARDING PROBABILITY OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR AMONG CERTAIN KINDS OF PEOPLE TO INCREASE POLICE KNOWLEDGE AND THEREBY LIMIT DISCRIMINATION IN SEARCHES AND STOPS. ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED IN CLOSE CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED IN ORDER TO STRUCTURE POLICE DISCRETION AND MAKE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS POLICY DECISIONS REGARDING CATEGORIES OF PEOPLE STOPPED. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (STB)