Pritchard’s presence makes the case for an investigatory detention here stronger than the one before the Court in Butler, since there was no evidence that Officer Hedges had witnessed such an unlawful act prior to initiating the investigatory detention at issue there. Thus, the fact that Officer Pritchard did not actually witness an exchange between Defendant and the two individuals that approached his vehicle, while certainly making this c 2, 542 S.E.2d 703, 708, ftn. 2 (2001) (stating that “evidence that Defendant walked away from Miller after he asked Defendant to stop is not evidence that Defendant was attempting to flee from Miller and, thus, indicates nothing more than Defendant’s refusal to cooperate”); State v. Rhyne, 124 N.C. App. 84, 89-91, 478 S.E.2d 789, 791-93 (1996) (<HOLDING>); State v. Fleming, 106 N.C. App. 165, 170-71,
holding that an officer lacked reasonable suspicion to frisk a defendant who was sit ting in an area known to be a center of drug activity without taking evasive action or otherwise engaging in suspicious conduct recognizing a defendants giving of evasive answers when asked what he was doing in the area as a factor establishing reasonable suspicion holding that an officers observation of exchange of small object and money in a known drug trafficking area constituted reasonable suspicion 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 holding an anonymous tip insufficient to support reasonable suspicion based on the fact that defendant was suspected of drug activity in his community failed to corroborate he currently was engaged in drug related activity and surveillance failed to uncover any independent information that defendant was engaged in any criminal activity