Florida v. J.L., 981993

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtGinsburg
Citation529 U.S. 266,120 S.Ct. 1375
Docket Number981993
Decision Date28 March 2000
PartiesFLORIDA, PETITIONER v. J. L.1993. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

529 U.S. 266

120 S. Ct. 1375

FLORIDA
v.
J. L.

No. 98-1993

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

February 29, 2000, Argued

March 28, 2000, Decided


SYLLABUS

After an anonymous caller reported to the Miami-Dade Police that a young black male standing at a particular bus stop and wearing a plaid shirt was carrying a gun, officers went to the bus stop and saw three black males, one of whom, respondent J. L., was wearing a plaid shirt. Apart from the tip, the officers had no reason to suspect any of the three of illegal conduct. The officers did not see a firearm or observe any unusual movements. One of the officers frisked J. L. and seized a gun from his pocket. J. L., who was then almost 16, was charged under state law with carrying a concealed firearm without a license and possessing a firearm while under the age of 18. The trial court granted his motion to suppress the gun as the fruit of an unlawful search. The intermediate appellate court reversed, but the Supreme Court of Florida quashed that decision and held the search invalid under the Fourth Amendment.

Held: 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. An officer, for the protection of himself and others, may conduct a carefully limited search for weapons in the outer clothing of persons engaged in unusual conduct where, inter alia, the officer reasonably concludes in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons in question may be armed and presently dangerous. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 88 S. Ct. 1868. Here, the officers' suspicion that J. L. was carrying a weapon arose not from their own observations but solely from a call made from an unknown location by an unknown caller. The tip lacked sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make a Terry stop: It provided no predictive information and therefore left the police without means to test the informant's knowledge or credibility. See Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 327, 110 L. Ed. 2d 301, 110 S. Ct. 2412. The contentions of Florida and the United States as amicus that the tip was reliable because it accurately described J. L.'s visible attributes misapprehend the reliability needed for a tip to justify a Terry stop. 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. This Court also declines to adopt the argument that the standard Terry analysis should be modified to license a "firearm exception," under which a tip alleging an illegal gun would justify a stop and frisk even if the accusation would fail standard pre-search reliability testing. The facts of this case do not require the Court to speculate about the circumstances under which the danger alleged in an anonymous tip might be so great -- e.g., a report of a person carrying a bomb -- as to justify a search even without a showing of reliability.

727 So. 2d 204, affirmed.

Michael J. Neimand argued the cause for petitioner.

Irving L. Gornstein argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of court.

Harvey J. Sepler argued the cause for respondent.

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which REHNQUIST, C. J., joined.

GINSBURG

OPINION

[529 U.S. 268] [120 S. Ct 1377] JUSTICE GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court.

The question presented in this case is whether HN1an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun is, without more, sufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of that person. We hold that it is not.

I

On October 13, 1995, an anonymous caller reported to the Miami-Dade Police that a young black male standing at a particular bus stop and wearing a plaid shirt was carrying a gun. App. to Pet. for Cert. A-40-A-41. So far as the record reveals, there is no audio recording of the tip, and nothing is known about the informant. Sometime after the police received the tip -- the record does not say how long -- two officers were instructed to respond. They arrived at the bus stop about six minutes later and saw three black males "just hanging out [there]." Id. at A-42. One of the three, respondent J. L., was wearing a plaid shirt. Id. at A-41. Apart from the tip, the officers had no reason to suspect any of the three of illegal conduct. The officers did not see a firearm, and J. L. made no threatening or otherwise unusual movements. Id. at A-42-A-44. One of the officers approached J. L., told him to put his hands up on the bus stop, frisked him, and seized a gun from J. L.'s pocket. The second officer frisked the other two individuals, against whom no allegations had been made, and found nothing.

[529 U.S. 269] J. L., who was at the time of the frisk "10 days shy of his 16th birthday," Tr. of Oral Arg. 6, was charged under state law with carrying a concealed firearm without a license and possessing a firearm while under the age of 18. He moved to suppress the gun as the fruit of an unlawful search, and the trial court granted his motion. The intermediate appellate court reversed, but the Supreme Court of Florida [120 S. Ct 1378] quashed that decision and held the search invalid under the Fourth Amendment. 727 So. 2d 204 (1998).

Anonymous tips, the Florida Supreme Court stated, are generally less reliable than tips from known informants and can form the basis for reasonable suspicion only if accompanied by specific indicia of reliability, for example, the correct forecast of a subject's "'not easily predicted'" movements. Id. at 207 (quoting Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 332, 110 L. Ed. 2d 301, 110 S. Ct. 2412 (1990)). The tip leading to the frisk of J. L., the court observed, provided no such predictions, nor did it contain any other qualifying indicia of reliability. 727 So. 2d at 207-208. Two justices dissented. The safety of the police and the public, they maintained, justifies a "firearm exception" to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the basis of bare-boned anonymous tips. 727 So. 2d at 214-215.

Seeking review in this Court, the State of Florida noted that the decision of the State's Supreme Court conflicts with decisions of other courts declaring similar searches compatible with the Fourth Amendment. See, e.g., United States v. DeBerry, 76 F.3d 884, 886-887 (CA7 1996); United States v. Clipper, 297 U.S. App. D.C. 372, 973 F.2d 944, 951 (CADC 1992). We granted certiorari, 528 U.S. -- (1999), and now affirm the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court.

II

Our "stop and frisk" decisions begin with Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 88 S. Ct. 1868 (1968). This Court held in Terry

"HN2Where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his [529 U.S. 270] experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where in the course of investigating this behavior he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2035 practice notes
  • Estate of Bryant v. Balt. Police Dep't, Civil Action No. ELH-19-384
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • February 10, 2020
    ...victim. See ECF 1, ¶ 30. But, an anonymous tip does not necessarily justify a stop-and-frisk, much less an arrest. See Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 273-74 (2000) (anonymous tip, without indicia of reliability, cannot support reasonable suspicion). Thus, plaintiffs plausibly allege that Mr......
  • United States v. Williams, No. 12–3864.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • September 24, 2013
    ...report describes an ongoing emergency, as opposed to general criminality. See Hicks, 531 F.3d at 558–59 (distinguishing Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 268, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000) on the basis that the report in Hicks provided details of an ongoing emergency situation, wherea......
  • Evans v. Chalmers, Nos. 11–1436
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 17, 2012
    ...truthful, yet perhaps inadequately verified, information under Franks, we nonetheless find McFadyen's argument meritless. Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000), on which McFadyen heavily relies, in fact provides him little support. J.L. holds that police offi......
  • Zandhri v. Dortenzio, No. CIV.A.3:99 CV 1776 (CFD).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Connecticut)
    • October 31, 2002
    ...and reliability must be carefully scrutinized. See id.; Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317; see also Florida v. Page 176 J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 270, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000). So too with confidential informants. See Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2031 cases
  • Estate of Bryant v. Balt. Police Dep't, Civil Action No. ELH-19-384
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • February 10, 2020
    ...victim. See ECF 1, ¶ 30. But, an anonymous tip does not necessarily justify a stop-and-frisk, much less an arrest. See Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 273-74 (2000) (anonymous tip, without indicia of reliability, cannot support reasonable suspicion). Thus, plaintiffs plausibly allege that Mr......
  • United States v. Williams, No. 12–3864.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • September 24, 2013
    ...report describes an ongoing emergency, as opposed to general criminality. See Hicks, 531 F.3d at 558–59 (distinguishing Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 268, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000) on the basis that the report in Hicks provided details of an ongoing emergency situation, wherea......
  • Evans v. Chalmers, Nos. 11–1436
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 17, 2012
    ...truthful, yet perhaps inadequately verified, information under Franks, we nonetheless find McFadyen's argument meritless. Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000), on which McFadyen heavily relies, in fact provides him little support. J.L. holds that police offi......
  • Zandhri v. Dortenzio, No. CIV.A.3:99 CV 1776 (CFD).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Connecticut)
    • October 31, 2002
    ...and reliability must be carefully scrutinized. See id.; Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317; see also Florida v. Page 176 J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 270, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000). So too with confidential informants. See Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • The Rehnquist Court and Criminal Justice
    • United States
    • Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice Nbr. 19-2, May 2003
    • May 1, 2003
    ...(1996).Fliter, J. (2001). Prisoners’ rights: The Supreme Court and evolving standards ofdecency. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000).Fortunato, S. (1999). The Supreme Court’s experience gap. Judicature,82, 251.Gest, T. (2001). Crime and politics: Big government’serr......
  • Recent Legal Developments
    • United States
    • Criminal Justice Review Nbr. 39-4, December 2014
    • December 1, 2014
    ...—, 133 S. Ct. — (2013).Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969).Fernandez v. California, — U.S. —, 133 S. Ct. — (2014).Florida v. J. L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000).Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006).Hall v. Florida, — U.S. —, 133 S. Ct. — (2014).Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. —, — S. Ct......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT