Florida v. J.L.
529 U.S. 266 (2000)
Rule of Law:
An anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun is not, without more, sufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of that person under the Fourth Amendment. To be considered reliable, such a tip must be corroborated by more than just details readily observable to the public.
Facts:
- An anonymous caller reported to the Miami-Dade Police that a young Black male at a specific bus stop, wearing a plaid shirt, was carrying a gun.
- The police had no information about the informant and no audio recording of the call.
- Two police officers arrived at the bus stop about six minutes later.
- The officers saw three Black males at the stop, one of whom, respondent J.L., was wearing a plaid shirt.
- Apart from the anonymous tip, the officers had no reason to suspect any of the individuals of illegal conduct.
- The officers did not see a firearm, and J.L. made no threatening or otherwise unusual movements.
- An officer approached J.L., instructed him to put his hands up, and conducted a frisk, seizing a gun from J.L.'s pocket.
- At the time of the frisk, J.L. was 15 years old.
Procedural Posture:
- J.L. was charged in a Florida state trial court with carrying a concealed firearm without a license and possessing a firearm while under the age of 18.
- The trial court granted J.L.'s motion to suppress the gun as the fruit of an unlawful search.
- The State of Florida, as appellant, appealed the decision, and the intermediate appellate court reversed the trial court's suppression order.
- J.L., as appellant, appealed to the Supreme Court of Florida, which quashed the intermediate appellate court's decision and held the search was invalid.
- The State of Florida, as petitioner, was granted a writ of certiorari by the United States Supreme Court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun, without more, provide sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of that person under the Fourth Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Ginsburg
No. An anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun, without more, lacks the sufficient indicia of reliability needed to provide reasonable suspicion for a stop and frisk. The Fourth Amendment requires that an anonymous tip be reliable in its assertion of illegality, not just in its tendency to identify a determinate person. Unlike a tip from a known informant whose credibility can be assessed, an anonymous tip is inherently less reliable. To establish reliability, the tip must contain predictive information about future behavior that officers can corroborate, as this suggests the informant has inside knowledge of the suspect's affairs. In this case, the tip provided no predictive information and only described J.L.'s location and appearance, details which are readily observable by anyone. The Court rejected Florida's argument for a 'firearm exception' to the reliability standard, warning that such an exception would invite harassment through false anonymous reports and could easily be expanded to other categories of crime, thereby eroding Fourth Amendment protections.
Concurring - Justice Kennedy
Yes, the Court is correct on this record that the stop was not justified. However, there may be other indicia of reliability for anonymous tips that could justify police action in future cases. For example, if technology like caller identification or voice recording allows police to identify and hold an informant accountable, it may lend credibility to the tip. An informant who provides information face-to-face, or a caller whose voice is recognized from prior reliable tips, could also present a different scenario. The core problem with a truly anonymous tip, as in this case, is that the informant has not placed their credibility at risk and can lie with impunity, making it impossible for a court to judge their reliability.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the standard for reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tips, reinforcing the precedent set in Alabama v. White. The Court's refusal to create a 'firearm exception' prevents the dilution of the Fourth Amendment's reliability requirement for tips involving serious crimes. This holding mandates that law enforcement cannot act on bare-bones anonymous allegations of gun possession and must instead seek independent corroboration that demonstrates the informant has knowledge of concealed criminal activity. The case stands as a crucial bulwark against intrusive searches based on unaccountable sources, emphasizing that the quality of information is paramount for justifying a government intrusion, regardless of the gravity of the alleged offense.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Florida v. J.L. (2000)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"