Florida v. J. L.

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Michael J. Neimand (Fort Lauderdale, Florida, argued the cause for the petitioner)
Harvey J. Sepler (Miami, Florida, argued the cause for respondent)
Irving L. Gornstein (Argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of court, supporting the petitioner)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
98-1993
Petitioner: 
Florida
Respondent: 
J. L.
Opinion: 
529 U.S. 266 (2000)
Categories: 
fourth amendment, searches and seizures, criminal procedure

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Florida v. J. L. , 529 U.S. 266 (2000)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1999/1999_98_1993)
Facts of the Case: 

On October 13, 1995 Miami-Dade police received an anonymous tip that a black male wearing a plaid shirt was standing near a bus stop carrying a gun. The two officers who responded found three black males, one of which, J.L., a 15-year-old, was wearing a plaid shirt. After frisking him, the officers did find a firearm.

J.L. was charged with carrying a concealed weapon without a license. At trial, he moved to suppress the gun as evidence, arguing that the frisking performed by the officers was illegal under the Fourth Amendment. The trial court granted the motion, but was reversed by the immediate appellate court. The Florida Supreme Court overruled the appellate court and suppressed the evidence.

Question: 

Did searching J.L. solely on the basis of the anonymous tip received by the Miami-Dade police violate his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure?

Conclusion: 

Yes. In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court concluded that J.L. the anonymous tip did not meet the minimum requirements to perform a warrantless search. Justice Ginsburg, drawing from the Court's logic in Terry v. Ohio and Adams v. Williams, indicated that an anonymous tip must posses a moderate level of reliability, including "predictive information" that offers police a "means to test the informant's knowledge or credibility." An accurate description of a person without a reliable assertion of illegality or description of the crime in question, as was the anonymous tip in this case, does not meet this standard. "All the police had to go on in this case was the bare report of an unknown, unaccountable informant who neither explained how he knew about the gun nor supplied any basis for believe he had inside information."

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for J. L., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 4: Fourth Amendment

Sort by Seniority

Voted with the majority
Stevens
Wrote the majority opinion
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Wrote a regular concurrence
Kennedy
Voted with the majority, joined Kennedy's concurrence
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Thomas

Full Opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg