a five-minute delay caused a passenger “to squirm in her seat” and “this fidgeting ultimately led the troopers to the contraband”); United States v. Maldonado, 356 F.3d 130, 132-33 (1st Cir.2004) (police noted that the defendant was speeding, driving without the corrective eyewear his license said he needed, his license had been suspended, he had not maintained the required logbook for long distance trucking, and his story was inconsistent, all before calling for a canine unit); Owens, 167 F.3d at 747 (police noted that the driver was speeding and had no license, the driver and passengers gave “conflicting responses” to police, including false names, and a check revealed that defendants had multiple prior convictions, all before calling for a canine unit); Sowers, 136 F.3d at 27-28 (<HOLDING>). Thus, even if the initial stop were lawful
holding that extreme nervousness potentially inconsistent stories and other suspicious answers did not amount to a reasonable or articulable suspicion holding that after receiving conflicting stories from a driver and passenger the officer had reasonable suspicion to expand the scope of the terry stop and conduct background checks on them both holding that while nervousness may be considered as part of the totality of circumstances nervousness standing alone was insufficient to expand a terry stop into an inquiry into drug activity holding that receiving conflicting stories from the driver and passenger of a stopped car about their travel gave the officer reasonable suspicion to extend the terry stop holding that poststop behavior such as the inability to confirm identity excessive nervousness and conflicting stories provided adequate justification to prolong stop