D.P. v. State, 65 So. 3d 123

D.P. is a juvenile charged with carrying a concealed firearm and possession of a firearm by a minor after a pat-down found a gun on his person.
Officer Tate, in uniform, responded to a report of juveniles loitering; a nervous female informant identifiably pointed to D.P. and claimed he had a gun.
The informant's demeanor led Tate to believe her information credible; he confronted D.P. to verify the report.
Tate conducted a limited pat-down after D.P. backed away, feeling a hard metallic object that was a firearm.
The stop and search proceeded under Terry v. Ohio guidance for reasonable suspicion; the firearm was introduced after D.P. was detained.
The trial court denied the suppression motion, and the court ultimately adjudicated D.P. delinquent; the appellate court affirmed denial of suppression.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the pat-down was supported by reasonable suspicion	D.P. argues no reasonable suspicion existed	State argues information and circumstances created reasonable suspicion	Yes; suppression denied
Whether the informant was a citizen informant or anonymous tipster	State contends informant was citizen informant	D.P. argues informant resembled anonymous tipster	Informant treated as citizen informant for totality of circumstances

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (established permissible limited pat-down with reasonable suspicion)
Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (1990) (reasonable suspicion assessed by totality of the circumstances; tip reliability matters)
United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (totality of circumstances approach; information quality and quantity considered)
Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000) (anonymous tipster generally insufficient without corroboration)
Baptiste v. State, 995 So.2d 285 (Fla. 2008) (reliability scales of anonymous vs citizen informants; face-to-face tips carry greater weight)