by law enforcement as a ‘high-crime neighborhood.’ " C.E.L., 995 So.2d at 563 (Altenbernd, J., concurring). 3 . After C.E.L. was apprehended and arrested on the obstruction charge, the officers also determined that he had an outstanding arrest warrant. However, the officers’ discovery of the existence of the outstanding arrest warrant after he was stopped has no effect on our analysis of the section 843.02 violation. 4 .In 'Wardlow, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant's “unprovoked flight upon noticing the police” in a high-crime area was suggestive of wrongdoing and therefore provided reasonable suspicion justifying an investigatory detention. See Wardlow, 528 U.S. at 124-26, 120 S.Ct. 673. 5 . Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30, 88 S.Ct 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968) (<HOLDING>). 6 . This is entirely consistent with Florida
holding that absent probable cause to arrest a police officer may approach an individual to conduct a brief investigatory stop when the officer has a reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal conduct is afoot holding that officers may consistent with the fourth amendment conduct a brief investigatory stop when they have a reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot holding that an officer  may detain a person in order to determine identity and circumstance when that officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts that criminal activity may be afoot holding that an officer can stop an individual if the officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity is underfoot recognizing that police officer may stop a suspect if the officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts that criminal activity may be afoot