Whether the State Court's of Pennsylvania Committed Reversible Error

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Whether the State Court's of Pennsylvania Committed Reversible Error by Lowering the Fourth Amendment Standard that Reviewing Court's Must Look at the Whole Picture and the Requisite that an Officer Must Articulate ("Specific and Articulable Fact's) to Reach a Particular Quantum of Cause to Permit a Traffic Stop for a Motor Vehicle Code Violation Pursuant to State Statute. Did the State Court of Appeals Err by Finding the Officer in Question Testimony Established Probable Cause to Support the Stop? 2. Whether the Unrelated Questioning of Petitioner Concerning his Status of Supervision by the Officer Deviate from the Seizure's Mission of the Traffic Stop, and Unreasonably Prolong the Stop of Petitioner Beyond the Time Necessary to Advise Petitioner he was Free to Leave the stop without a Warning, and Then Seized Again by the Probation Partner's of the Officer for the Same Facts Presented to the Officer. Did the Extension of the Traffic Stop Violate Petitioner's Fourth Amendment Right's Under This Court's Holding in Rodriguez, and in the Alternative was the Seizure by Probation a Continuation of the Traffic Stop, although Police Advised him he was Free to Leave, and if so Did the Seizure Violate the Fourth Amendment? 3. Whether the Probation Partner's of the Police Unit Lacked Reasonable Suspicion to Seize Petitioner, After he was Released from the Traffic Stop Without a Warning. Probation was Not Familiar with Petitioner or his Particular Case for the Probation. Did the State Court's Violate Petitioner's Fourth Amendment Right's in Finding Reasonable Suspicion Existed to Seize and Search him and his Property, for the same Facts available to Police Whom Did Not Believe they Possessed Reasonable Suspicion to Continue the Stop? (i)