Anonymous Tip, cannabis, dui, marijuana, trafficking

Marijuana Anonymous Tip Case at Supreme Court may Affect DUI Traffic Stops

A drug case (marijuana / cannabis) at the United States Supreme Court may impact defendants across the United States including Florida D U I defendants who have been stopped based on anonymous tips to 911 operators. The questions will be: 
Does the Fourth Amendment require an officer who receives an anonymous tip regarding a drunken or reckless driver to corroborate dangerous driving before stopping the vehicle?
Does the Fourth Amendment require an officer who receives an anonymous tip regarding a drunken or reckless driver to corroborate dangerous driving before stopping the vehicle?
Does an anonymous tip that a specific vehicle ran someone of the road provide reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle, where the detaining officer was only advised to be on the lookout for a reckless driver, and the officer could not corroborate dangerous driving despite following the suspect vehicle for several miles?
Here is the story: On August 23,2008, a California Highway Patrol dispatcher working out of Mendocino County received a telephone call from a Humboldt County dispatcher, who described a pickup truck that had run someone off the roadway and was last seen five minutes before heading south on California’s Highway 1, approximately 3 miles south of the county border.  The Humboldt dispatcher said that the information had come from a 911 call, but provided no further information.
The cops stopped the defendant’s truck. “Officers searched the vehicle after detecting the smell of marijuana, and discovered four large, closed bags of marijuana in the bed.” This case provides the Court with the perfect opportunity to answer that important question and ensure that lower courts do not sanction further violations of the Fourth Amendment.
Florida case law may play a role: Florida v. J.L., 529 US. 266 (2000), involved an anonymous tip about a young Black male wearing a plaid shirt and standing at a particular bus stop who was also carrying a gun. The Court found that the tip did not have the “moderate ‘indicia of reliability”‘ required to provide reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop under the Fourth Amendment, in part because the lack of “predictive information” meant the officers could not test the informant’s knowledge or credibility. 529 U.S. at 268,271. “The reasonable suspicion here at issue requires that a tip be reliable in its assertion of illegality, not just in its tendency to identify a determinate person.” 529 U.S. at 272.
Navarette vs. California, No. 12-9490