possessed reasonable suspicion to conduct the traffic stop. The officer further possessed reasonable suspicion to extend the duration of that stop to include additional investigative questions and drug dog search. Thus, there was probable cause to search the trunk. Therefore, the district court did not err in denying Kelley’s motion to suppress evidence. Accordingly, Kelley’s judgment of conviction for trafficking in marijuana is affirmed. Judge GUTIERREZ and Judge GRATTON concur. 1 . It is apparent from the testimony that limited access and controlled access are used interchangeably. 2 . To support his argument that the purpose of the stop had ended before the suspicious information arose, Kelley analogizes his case to State v. Gutierrez, 137 Idaho 647, 51 P.3d 461 (Ct.App. 2002) (<HOLDING>). Kelley asks this Court to conclude that,
holding that during a routine traffic stop it is reasonable for an officer to search the driver for weapons before placing the driver in a patrol car if placing the driver in the patrol car during the investigation prevents officers or the driver from being subjected to a dangerous condition and placing the driver in the patrol car is the least intrusive means to avoid the dangerous condition 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 holding that it was impermissible for an officer to question a driver about matters unrelated to the traffic stop after the officer had fulfilled the purpose of the stop by issuing a written warning to the driver holding that even if an officer has an ulterior motive that does not authorize him to conduct a traffic stop of a particular vehicle he may still lawfully execute the stop if he observes the driver violate a traffic law holding that the constitutional reasonableness of a traffic stop did not depend on the actual motivation of the officer involved as long as the officer articulated a lawful reason for the stop