Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision is contrary to SCOTUS precedent on reasonable suspicion analysis

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in this case is contrary to this Court’s precedent and established framework for the analysis of reasonable suspicion where the Pennsylvania Court did not analyze the totality of the circumstances as perceived by the police officer and instead imagined innocent scenarios to delimit those factors and ultimately decided that the stop was unconstitutional. 2. Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s outright rejection of the element-or-defense test to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists when an individual is carrying a firearm in public as unconstitutional is error when this test has been widely accepted by other federal and state jurisdictions.