Officer Harvey to fear for his safety.... While there are two other officers there, he is the only one close to [Johnson]; and he is actually very physically close to [Johnson], None of the others, including Officer Harvey, has their weapons drawn, or is in any other way prepared to intervene if [Johnson] should pull a weapon, or do anything else of a physically-aggressive nature. I conclude, on the basis of the totality of circumstances here, as testified by the witnesses, that a frisk was warranted for the officers’ protection. II. We begin our discussion with what is not at issue on this appeal. Johnson does not dispute that the police had reason to stop his car and order him to step out of it. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330, 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Nor does he question their authority to
holding that once a vehicle has been lawfully stopped an officer may order the driver out of the vehicle without violating the fourth amendment holding that except in those situations in which there is at least articulable and reasonable suspicion that a motorist is unlicensed or that an automobile is not registered  stopping an automobile and detaining the driver in order to check his drivers license and the registration of the automobile are unreasonable under the fourth amendment holding that the consent of the driver was invalid when the officer knew that the passenger was the owner of the automobile holding that where a police officer observes expired automobile tags it is reasonable and comports with the fourth amendment for the officer to order the driver out of the car even absent a suspicion of foul play holding that a police officer may stop a driver where the officer has a reasonable and articulable suspicion regarding the commission of a civil traffic violation