Whether officers can reasonably fear a suspect will retrieve a weapon after being told he is free to go

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether this Court should reconsider the reasonableness of its premise in Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983), that officers could reasonably fear that after a suspect is told he is free to go and permitted to reenter his automobile he would then retrieve a weapon from the automobile and attack police, when he did not take the opportunity to do so when he was first stopped. 2. Whether, under Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983), the possibility that if a suspect is not placed under arrest he will be permitted to reenter his automobile and have access to any weapons inside is a valid justification for a protective sweep of the automobile, when the officer knows at the time of the protective sweep that the suspect will be arrested and will not be permitted to reenter his automobile, even though at the time of the protective sweep the suspect has not yet been placed . under full custodial arrest. a. Undecided Question of Law: Whether the 4th Amendiart allows officers bo le ly Circunvent the “¢ chin distance” rationale as established. in Arizong: Ve cn Lat S.CE.I710 C00’), Hey, officers strategically leas a motorist unrestrained ond netry «vehicle, after a ttlic stop, in ocdler 40 justify the conch of 0 “patectve Sweeps’ under the purview of officer safety.