By: dmc-admin//August 6, 2001//
“Here, because the caller gave what he said was his name, the trial court erred in viewing the call as an anonymous one. Whether the caller gave correct identifying information, or whether the police ultimately could have verified his identity, the fact remains that the police could have reasonably concluded that the caller, ‘by providing self-identifying information, … risked that [his] identity would be discovered.’…
“Thus, in this case, the reasonableness of the police suspicion is more firmly based than that in [Florida v.] J.L [529 U.S. 266 (2000)]. The caller gave information about the suspects and their location, which the police verified before stopping them. The caller also gave what he said was his name. We see no legal or logical reason to indulge the factual fiction that would convert this non-anonymous call to an anonymous one, and thus exclude its apparent reliability as a very significant factor to be considered in ‘the totality of the circumstances’ determining the lawfulness of the investigative stop.”
Order reversed.
Recommended for publication in the official reports.
Dist I, Milwaukee County, Sankovitz, J., Schudson, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Christian R. Larsen, Madison; Nelson W. Phillips III, Milwaukee
For Respondent: Elvis Banks, Milwaukee