number was the same number supplied by two separate anonymous tipsters who generated the visit by the deputies to Salyers’ residence. 8. A records check revealed that Sal-yers had a criminal history of cocaine and cannabis possession. The Sheriffs initial reason for visiting Salyers’ premises was the anonymous telephone calls supplying the address and cell telephone number relating to drug possession and illicit sales that were almost two months stale by the time of the visit. No further information had been gathered between the time of the telephone tips and the visit and we must conclude that at the time the deputies entered the residence, no reasonable suspicion existed that Salyers was then engaged in an illegal activity. See State v. D.D.D., 908 So.2d 1180 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (<HOLDING>). Salyers argues that the facts in Miller v.
holding that a tip may provide the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify an investigatory stop recognizing anonymous tips referring to activity that is occurring at the time the tip is made that provide only innocent details of identification are less reliable and require some corroboration to provide the foundation for reasonable suspicion holding that a mere anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun  without any corroborating evidence  does not provide a reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing justifying the officers stop and frisk of that person holding that the fact the defendant matched an anonymous tips description was seen in a high crime area and walked away when police approached was insufficient to provide reasonable suspicion holding that an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun  without any corroborating evidence  did not provide reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing justifying the officers stop and frisk of that person