adjoining areas when there are “articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbor[ed] an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.” Id. This “protective sweep” is not a license to search every nook and cranny of a house, but is subject to two significant limitations: it “extend[s] only to a cursory inspection of those spaces where a person may be found” and lasts “no longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises.” Id. at 335-36, 110 S.Ct. 1093. B In this case, we need not decide whether Detective Longoria or the other investigating officers had “articulable facts which ... w 290-91, 429 F.3d 282, 288 (D.C.Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); In re Sealed Case, 153 F.3d 759, 763, 770
holding that under buie the second room in a tworoom apartment immediately adjoined the first room in which the suspect was arrested holding that child cannot consent to search of parents bedroom holding that buie permitted a search of an open storage unit when the suspect was arrested immediately outside holding that a defendants sister could consent to a search of only the common areas of their shared house and her own bedroom and explicitly stating that the sister could not consent to search the defendants bedroom because the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in her own bedroom holding that buie permitted the search of a bedroom fifteen feet down a hallway in which the suspect was arrested