Is this standard?

Big Gay Al said:

Except, we don't know that the tip was anonymous. It's possible who ever called gave their name and number.

Click to expand...

I must disagree, even if the caller identified himself as Stanley T. Wojciehowicz @ 718 555-1212, it would not have established any reputation of reliability from the name alone.

"... In the instant case, the officers' suspicion that J. L. was carrying a weapon arose not from any observations of their own but solely from a call made from an unknown location by an unknown caller. Unlike a tip from a known informant whose reputation can be assessed and who can be held responsible if her allegations turn out to be fabricated, see Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 146-147 (1972), "an anonymous tip alone seldom demonstrates the informant's basis of knowledge or veracity," Alabama v. White, 496 U.S., at 329. As we have recognized, however, there are situations in which an anonymous tip, suitably corroborated, exhibits "sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make the investigatory stop." Id., at 327. The question we here confront is whether the tip pointing to J. L. had those indicia of reliability.

In White, the police received an anonymous tip asserting that a woman was carrying cocaine and predicting that she would--
-- leave an apartment building at a specified time,
-- get into a car matching a particular description, and
-- drive to a named motel. Ibid.
Standing alone, the tip would not have justified a Terry stop. Id., at 329. Only after police observation showed that the informant had accurately predicted the woman's movements, we explained, did it become reasonable to think the tipster had inside knowledge about the suspect and therefore to credit his assertion about the cocaine. Id., at 332..."

SpringerXDacp said:

SCOTUS ruled in Florida v. J.L. that an anonymous tip of a gun/firearm does not constitute RAS.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0529_0266_ZO.html

Click to expand...

We don't know if it was anonymous or not; I would think it wasn't anonymous. Also, because I'm at work on my phone I can't post a cite right this moment but there was a SCOTUS decision that basically said a LEO can't detain for simply driving a car, absent any other apparent violation of the law. However, the SCOTUS has NOT rendered such a ruling regarding firearms in motor vehicles. Therefore, obtaining information from a source that there is a pistol in the door would most likely supply RAS, any analogy to driving notwithstanding. (Sorry smellslikemichigan)

Fallschirmjäger said:

I must disagree, even if the caller identified himself as Stanley T. Wojciehowicz @ 718 555-1212, it would not have established any reputation of reliability from the name alone.

"... In the instant case, the officers' suspicion that J. L. was carrying a weapon arose not from any observations of their own but solely from a call made from an unknown location by an unknown caller. Unlike a tip from a known informant whose reputation can be assessed and who can be held responsible if her allegations turn out to be fabricated, see Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 146-147 (1972), "an anonymous tip alone seldom demonstrates the informant's basis of knowledge or veracity," Alabama v. White, 496 U.S., at 329. As we have recognized, however, there are situations in which an anonymous tip, suitably corroborated, exhibits "sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make the investigatory stop." Id., at 327. The question we here confront is whether the tip pointing to J. L. had those indicia of reliability.

In White, the police received an anonymous tip asserting that a woman was carrying cocaine and predicting that she would--
-- leave an apartment building at a specified time,
-- get into a car matching a particular description, and
-- drive to a named motel. Ibid.
Standing alone, the tip would not have justified a Terry stop. Id., at 329. Only after police observation showed that the informant had accurately predicted the woman's movements, we explained, did it become reasonable to think the tipster had inside knowledge about the suspect and therefore to credit his assertion about the cocaine. Id., at 332..."

Click to expand...

I must also disagree. If I give my name and phone number, it's not anonymous.

Did I use too many words at one time or something??

I did not say that if you gave your name and number (or even your street address, social security number and a thumb print) that it's not anonymous.

I reported the Supreme Court's opinion that even knowing the tipster's name and telephone address was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion, (unless the tip is from an known informant who could be held responsible) without other supporting information. I'm going to go on the assumption that like the vast majority of the population, you're not a known criminal informant and are therefore your veracity and character are unknown. Even if Barrack Obama were to call the police and give the same report in this instance, it would be insufficient.

Fallschirmjäger said:

Did I use too many words at one time or something??

I did not say that if you gave your name and number (or even your street address, social security number and a thumb print) that it's not anonymous.

I reported the Supreme Court's opinion that even knowing the tipster's name and telephone address was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion, (unless the tip is from an known informant who could be held responsible) without other supporting information. I'm going to go on the assumption that like the vast majority of the population, you're not a known criminal informant and are therefore your veracity and character are unknown. Even if Barrack Obama were to call the police and give the same report in this instance, it would be insufficient.

Click to expand...

Are you a judge? Since LEOs don't need to give the person with whom they interact any information regarding RAS, how do you know whether the cop had RAS or not? We don't even know what kind of a "tip" it was. Btw, the court only said that there needed to be some sense of reliability involved... exactly what indicates this level of reliability is up to a court to decide. In just such a case imho, judges tend to give the benefit of doubt to the officer.

Fallschirmjäger said:

Did I use too many words at one time or something??

I did not say that if you gave your name and number (or even your street address, social security number and a thumb print) that it's not anonymous.

I reported the Supreme Court's opinion that even knowing the tipster's name and telephone address was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion, (unless the tip is from an known informant who could be held responsible) without other supporting information. I'm going to go on the assumption that like the vast majority of the population, you're not a known criminal informant and are therefore your veracity and character are unknown. Even if Barrack Obama were to call the police and give the same report in this instance, it would be insufficient.

Click to expand...

Since the part you quoted still kept saying "anonymous." No mention was made of any named individual giving information. The idea of a "known informant" is listed as an example of who can be trusted, but I don't see that it is limited to known informants. If I call the police using my cell phone, they have my number.

And until someone executes an FOIA request, we won't know if the call made to the local LEOs in this thread's first post was anonymous or not.

I also don't see where you get that the Supreme Court's opinion is that a named tipster is insufficient. No mention was made of a named informant, in all the examples listed, the informants are listed as anonymous. I don't see where your conclusion comes from.

This sounds an lot like a stop that happened to me years ago...except I was OC. (big Colt revolver, very hard to miss)

Coming out of a grocery store after purchasing camp supplies, and putting them away in the camper on the back of my truck.

Deputy Sheriff rolls up, gets out and asked "hunting", I answered "yep". End of conversation.

Sorry, but merely having someone's name and telephone number does not establish them as a "known informant" to the police, nor someone who's veracity and character has been established.
The court went to great pains to say that even with anonymity, a substantiated tip, one with several particularized qualifying indicia of reliability could be used to establish suspicion but only upon the observance of those 'not easily predicted' movements.

Should one assume that just because a name has been given to the police that the veracity of his statements is proven?
Let's assume that two people have made a report (as outlined in the first post of this thread) of a 'man with a gun' to the police.
----------
One report is a caller who refused to give his name, and reported the archetypal MWAG but could not give a description of the gun.
Is that sufficient proof to warrant suspicion and a search?
----------
The other caller is BigGayAl, residing at 1234 Anywhere St, of Mason, MI., where he's been a resident for 17 years, telephone number 999-555-1212. BGA reports that a man wearing a blue Izod shirt buttoned all the way, wearing khaki Levi's Dockers with a stain on the left leg, carrying a Glock 23 in .40 caliber loaded with 13 Winchester Ranger brand cartridges. Further, he reports that said MWAG is driving a Ferarri F430 spider with a red paintjob and an Italian flag painted on the nose, license number "MYGLOCK" will be arriving at the hotel on the corner of 1st Avenue and Main Street in 24 minutes and then renting a room under the name of "Mr Glockman" using a Platinum American Express card.
Is that sufficient proof to warrant suspicion and a search as the law applies in the state of Michigan?

If you believe so, please state what the suspicion is of.

1Grizzly1 said:

A friend of mine was getting ready to go hunting. He stopped at a Menards to get some supplies. Apparently someone saw his pistol in his door pouch and called the police. They showed up and asked for his permit and ran him for warrants. He was free to go after that. Is that SOP for police in the upper peninsula? Seemed a little excessive to me.

Click to expand...

I suppose it all depends in what part of the U.P. It must have been either Marquette county sheriff or MSP that responded because I think Menards is outside of the city limits, unless Marquette city took it as a mutual aid.
Usually the cops up here are pretty laid back when it comes to gun laws. I do know of a person who had their UNregistered pistol returned to them by the MSP.

Big Gay Al said:

"...I also don't see where you get that the Supreme Court's opinion is that a named tipster is insufficient. No mention was made of a named informant, in all the examples listed, the informants are listed as anonymous. I don't see where your conclusion comes from...

Click to expand...

From the cases mentioned, Adams v. Williams, Alabama v. White, Florida v. J.L., , et al. I thought it was pretty clear that a mere name is not an indicia of reliability. The court made no mention of names, it did however make note of "known individuals" the difference being that one can know a person's character and yet not know their name.

I'm also fairly sure that the carrying of concealed weapons is lawful in Michigan with the appropriate license. As the informant did not state that the gentleman in this case was carrying a concealed firearm without a permit, the entire content of the anonymous tip would be a physical description of the individual, his location, and an allegation that he was carrying something lawful (a cellular telephone? a beeper? a firearm?) - U.S. Supreme court v. DeBerry. I'm sure everyone read that as it was linked to Florida v. J.L., right?