66 L.Ed.2d 621 (1981)). Although the scene the police came upon in front of the apartment building clearly gave them no reason to suspect Dortch of committing a traffic violation himself, the circumstances just as clearly indicated Dortch might be involved with the ongoing illegality the police observed. Not only was Dortch standing between the two illegally pai’ked vehicles when the officers arrived, he was leaning into one and talking to the driver. Indeed, Dortch significantly continued doing so during his initial interaction with Officer Sundermeier. On these facts, we hold Officer Sundermeier could briefly stop Dortch to investigate what was happening with the vehicles and his involve ment with it. Cf. Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408, 414-15, 117 S.Ct. 882, 137 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Sanders, 510 F.3d 788,
holding that passengers of automobiles that are pulled over by a police officer for a traffic stop are seized under the fourth amendment holding that passengers of a vehicle which they did not own had standing to challenge the validity of a traffic stop holding police officers making a traffic stop could order passengers out of the stopped car holding that police officer may order passengers to remain in vehicle with hands up during traffic stop holding that an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to exit the car pending completion of the stop