supra, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. at 3481, 77 L.Ed.2d at 1220; see also Gamble, supra, 218 N.J. at 431-32, 95 A.3d 188. The protective sweep exception in the automobile setting does not turn solely on the 53 (2003) (same). We disagree, however, with the trial court’s conclusion that Officer Ceei’s search of the car was a valid protective sweep. There is no doubt that Officer Ceci’s concerns that defendant and Henderson could be armed were justified. Prompted by the dispatcher, the officer properly relied on information provided by the NCIC database, which is used nationwide to protect police officers “who are at risk when they approach individuals during a traffic stop.” Sloane, supra, 193 N.J. at 434, 939 A.2d 796 (citing United States v. Finke, 85 F.3d 1275, 1280-81 (7th Cir. 1996) (<HOLDING>)). The setting in which the stop took place —
recognizing due process concerns inherent in sentencing based on false criminal history holding a court may consider a defendants criminal history even if that history is included in the defendants criminal history category recognizing that concerns for officer safety warrant criminal history check during traffic stop holding that an officer may order a passenger out of a vehicle during a stop for a traffic infraction holding officer had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity necessary to support traffic stop where officer received dispatch that defendant committed disorderly conduct and record check showed parked truck was registered to defendant