Does the collective knowledge or fellow officer doctrine eliminate the need for the BOLO-flyer to articulate facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that the wanted person has committed an offense?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Within a “very narrow exception” in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), an officer who objectively relies on a flyer issued by another officer who had the requisite knowledge may briefly detain a person even though the detaining officer had no personal knowledge. United States v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221 (1985); Whiteley v. Warden, 401 U.S. 560 (1971). But if the flyer “has been issued in the absence of a reasonable suspicion, then a stop in the objective reliance upon it violates the Fourth Amendment.” 469 U.S. at 232. The question presented is: Does the collective knowledge or fellow officer doctrine eliminate the need for the BOLO-flyer “to articulate facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that the wanted person has committed an offense,” with the result that an officer who lacks reasonable suspicion may stop or frisk a citizen at will? i