What is the test for warrantless searches where the police have been able to corroborate the identification of a defendant's identification but do not provide any evidence of criminal activity?

Even where the informant had provided reliable information in the past, we have declined to uphold a search where the police were only able to corroborate defendant's identification, but not any details suggestive of criminal activity (People v. Elwell, 50 N.Y.2d 231, 237, 428 N.Y.S.2d 655, 406 N.E.2d 471 [1980] [personal police observation corroborative of data received from the informant should be regarded as sufficient only when the police observe facts suggestive of criminal activity (emphasis added) ] ). We reasoned that [o]therwise privacy and liberty may be invaded by a warrantless search or arrest based solely on the quality of the informant and not at all on the quality of the information, i.e., its suggestiveness of criminal activity (id. ). Thus, [b]earing in mind the balance to be struck between the individual's constitutional right to be free of official interference by way of search or arrest with society's interest in preventing crime and apprehending criminals (id. at 241, 428 N.Y.S.2d 655, 406 N.E.2d 471 ), we concluded that