consequences, may not always wish to identify themselves and volunteer their names.” United States v. Perkins, 363 F.3d 317, 326 (4th Cir.2004). Finally, the officers corroborated several details of the 911 call. They discovered the black SUV in the precise location provided by the caller. See Chavez, 660 F.3d at 1222 (finding an unidentified caller’s tip reliable where the responding officer verified the tipster’s report of a black pickup truck and white Cadillac in a specific parking lot). Further, they spotted a light-skinned black male in a fuzzy hunting hat, just as the caller had described. See Copening, 506 F.3d at 1247 (emphasizing the fact that an officer corroborated the informant’s report before initiating a stop); Brown, 496 F.3d at 1077-78 (same); Johnson, 364 F.3d at 1191 (<HOLDING>). In fact, Mr. Conner’s counsel acknowledged at
holding that police officers have probable cause to arrest an individual with a sufficiently similar appearance to the description in a warrant holding that an anonymous informants ability to predict respondents future behavior  namely the route that respondent would take to deliver a package of cocaine  demonstrated inside information a special familiarity with respondents affairs and thus rendered the informants tip sufficiently reliable  although it was a close case holding tip to be sufficiently reliable where the officer confirmed an informants description of the suspects appearance and location though the officer did not personally witness any criminal behavior holding an informants tip can establish reasonable suspicion without investigative confirmation if the tip is credible holding that an anonymous tip that described a suspects appearance and location and alleged that he was carrying a concealed weapon was insufficiently corroborated by the officers observation of the appellant who matched the description hanging out at the indicated location