506 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Otherwise, the detention violates the detainee’s Fourth Amendment rights, and any evidence obtained as a result of that detention is subject to suppression. See Popple, 626 So.2d at 185, 188. The State properly concedes that the detention of the Nissan in the instant case constituted an investigatory stop, as the Nissan’s occupants were not free to leave once the officers blocked their vehicle’s exit. Cf. McCreary v. State, 538 So.2d 1377, 1378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Thus, the dispute in this case concerns whether the officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct the stop. An officer’s basis for conducting an investigatory stop must be more than “[a] hunch or mere suspicion.” Faunce, 884 So.2d at 506; see Daniels v. State, 543 So.2d 363, 366 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (<HOLDING>). To show a sufficient basis for an
recognizing investigatory stop must be justified by objective manifestation that person stopped is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity holding that an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun  without any corroborating evidence  did not provide reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing justifying the officers stop and frisk of that person holding that an anonymous tip must have sufficient indicia of reliability to justify a stop and frisk holding that a bare or gut feeling that a person is engaged in criminal activity is insufficient to justify a stop and frisk recognizing that an officer must have a reasonable articulable suspicion that the person has been is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity to frisk an individual for weapons and must have probable cause to conduct a further seizure