v. Rickus, 737 F.2d 360, 365 (3d Cir.1984); U.S. v. Vega-Barvo, 729 F.2d 1341, 1350 (11th Cir.1984). 11 . See also U.S. v. Gonzalez-Rincon, 36 F.3d 859, 864 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1323, 131 L.Ed.2d 203 (1995) (once customs agents have reasonable suspicion, they may detain passenger and "perform the searches necessary to either verify or dispel the suspicion”); U.S. v. Oyekan, 786 F.2d 832, 837 (8th Cir.1986) (reasonable suspicion justified detention for strip search and, when the strip search proved fruitless, until involuntary x-rays could be performed); U.S. v. Vega-Barvo, 729 F.2d 1341, 1344 (11th Cir.1984) (adopting a "flexible test which adjusts the strength of suspicion required for a particular search to the intrusiveness of that search.") and 1348 (<HOLDING>); U.S. v. Guadalupe-Garza, 421 F.2d 876, 878
recognizing that a parental consent requirement is more intrusive than a parental notification requirement recognizing that cjlearly buie requires more than ignorance or a constant assumption that more than one person is present in a residence holding that an xray while more intrusive than a frisk is no more intrusive than a strip search holding that more than notice to a defendant is required holding that it was plain error for trial court to allow more than one conviction of grossly negligent operation of a vehicle where more than one person was injured