Office of the Attorney General
SLIP OPINION
AG number: 10006 | Style: Johnson vs. State |
Jurisdiction: 2nd DCA | Date issued: October 1, 1999 |
Verification of tip caller's identity Even if a caller provides his name, address and phone number, police still need more to verify the caller's identity before he can be considered a citizen-informant to justify the search of a criminal suspect, the 2nd DCA said. The DCA said a trial court should have granted a motion to suppress evidence against a man charged with possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia. Curtis Johnson was arrested after a deputy, acting on a telephone tip, found him sitting on a curb with a cigarette pack containing crack cocaine lying approximately a foot away. The DCA concluded that the informant's information, without further verification, was insufficient to provide reasonable suspicion for the deputy to question Johnson. The court cited the Florida Supreme Court's 1998 decision in J.L. vs. State, which held that innocent detail tips from anonymous informants must be substantiated in some additional manner. "In this case, the informant was anonymous because the police did not independently verify his identity after he called, even though he provided his name, address, and telephone number. Additionally, the deputy testified that he did not have any independent reason to believe that Johnson was selling drugs. Because the anonymous informant's assertion that Johnson was selling drugs was not substantiated in any additional manner before (the deputy) initiated the search, he did not have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to pat down Johnson," the DCA said. Opinion # 10006 |