at 1688 (2014) (quoting Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2d 301 (1990)). Under appropriate circumstances, however, “an anonymous tip can demonstrate ‘sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make an investigatory stop.’ ” Id. (quoting White, 496 U.S. at 327). ¶ 26. We spoke to this in Floyd, which, as the majority points out, is distinguishable from the case before us, in that, unlike here, the person who called authorities was not anonymous. Floyd expressed, though, again as the majority points out, that an anonymous tip can be sufficiently credible and reliable and provide sufficient basis of knowledge to justify an investigatory stop. Floyd, 749 So.2d at 119 (citing State v. Melanson, 140 N.H. 199, 665 A.2d 338, 340-41 (1995)) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 27. Floyd reiterated that the test is “one
holding that although officers observation and stop of the defendants vehicle occurred outside of the officers geographical jurisdiction the officer still had jurisdiction where the officer was requested by a state trooper to stop the suspects vehicle 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 officer had reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle when confidential informant personally observed the vehicle provided a description of the vehicle and its direction detailed the basis for her suspicion that the vehicle was engaged in illegal activity and had previously given reliable information that led to the successful apprehension of individuals engaged in various criminal activity holding that unknown callers report that provided a specific description of a car whose driver was thought to be intoxicated knowledge of its exact location at the time and specific information of its movements reasonably supported the conclusion for the purpose of determining whether officer had reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle that the basis of the callers knowledge was his personal observation of the vehicle holding that a conclusion that reasonable suspicion supported the stop of a vehicle was subsumed within the trial courts ruling that the officer had probable cause for the stop