confidential source was not sufficiently corroborated before the warrantless probation search to satisfy a reasonable suspicion standard. Defendant cites to Urioste indicating an informant’s information must be sufficiently verified to show “past, present or pending criminal conduct” likely occurred or is occurring. 2002-NMSC-023, ¶ 9, 132 N.M. 592, 52 P.3d 964 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {51} Our Supreme Court further explained in Urioste that when a confidential source’s tip has a relatively low degree of reliability, but is corroborated by subsequent investigation, even the observation of lawful conduct can establish reasonable suspicion. Id. ¶¶ 16-17. In the present case, the district court ruled reasonable suspicion existed based on t N.M. 742, 975 P.2d 355 (<HOLDING>); State v. Taylor, 1999-NMCA-022, ¶ 8, 126 N.M.
holding an informants tip if questionable can be corroborated by the observation of lawful conduct holding an informants tip can establish reasonable suspicion without investigative confirmation if the tip is credible holding that an uncorroborated callers tip did not create reasonable suspicion holding that a tip may provide the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify an investigatory stop holding a tip by informant who claimed to witness wrongdoing sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion