officer’s detention of a suspect. Hilton v. State, 961 So.2d 284, 294 (Fla.2007). An officer need not actually witness any criminal activity in order to support a Terry-stop. Hernand s a reasonable, articulable, and particularized suspicion of criminal activity in order to justify his stop of the defendant. We find that the information known to Officer Sanchez and Officer Dunaske at the time they seized the defendant was sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was taking place. The undisputed facts show that the encounter with the defendant took place (1) at ten o’clock in the evening, (2) in a dark and poorly-lit area, (8) in a high crime neighborhood known for shootings and narcotics. See, e.g., State v. Russell, 659 So.2d 465, 466 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (<HOLDING>). Compare Hernandez, 784 So.2d at 1127 (finding
holding that a police officers suspicion that a car did not belong in a particular area in the early morning does not meet the requirement that a stop cannot be made without an  articulable and reasonable  suspicion of some criminal wrongdoing holding that the defendants presence in a dark alleyway at six oclock in the morning behind a closed business in an exclusively commercial area supported the investigative stop and explaining that knowledge of recent burglaries in an area is a relevant circumstance to be considered in determining the reasonableness of an officers suspicion because knowledge of the character of the area is part of an officers expertise holding that we show  deference to an agencys conclusions in the area of its expertise holding reasonable and articulable suspicion existed to support the investigatory stop of a vehicle in view of the time of day and the officers prior knowledge of reports of criminal activity in the area holding that specific knowledge of previous rapes in area was not necessary for rape to be foreseeable when defendant had knowledge of high crime rate of area generally