the tipster’s reputation cannot be assessed. J.L., 529 U.S. at 270, 120 S.Ct. 1375. Here, because a known MDOT complainant could be held accountable for fabricating any story, the concerns raised by anonymous tips are simply not present. At the suppression hearing, Officer Schock testified that he knew the report of erratic driving came from the MDOT. This fact was significant to Schock. Officer Schock testified that he worked closely with MDOT personnel, had received reports of traffic infractions and hazards in the past from MDOT, and had found those reports to be reliable. Because Officer Schock was familiar with MDOT personnel in his area and trusted their reports, he was entitled to weigh that fact in responding to the dispatch he received. See Adams, 407 U.S. at 147, 92 S.Ct. 1921(<HOLDING>). Even if we assume, arguendo, that the report
holding that an unverified tip from a known informant was sufficiently reliable to justify a terry stop and frisk holding that an anonymous tip must have sufficient indicia of reliability to justify a stop and frisk holding that information of criminal activity given by a known reliable informant is enough to sustain a terry stop holding that tip from known reliable informant that was immediately verifiable at the scene could form basis for reasonable suspicion and forcible terry stop holding that an anonymous tip supported a terry stop where the informant provided several details but refused to give his name