fleers had grounds to suspect Mocek had engaged or was engaged in disorderly behavior that would tend to disturb the peace at an airport security checkpoint. The fact that bystanders were undisturbed did not eliminate reasonable suspicion. Culpable conduct need not actually disturb the peace, but merely must be of the sort that tends to disturb the peace. State v. James M., 111 N.M. 473, 806 P.2d 1063, 1066 (Ct.App.1990). In concluding there was reasonable suspicion of disorderly conduct, we emphasize the uniquely sensitive setting we confront in this case. See Correa, 222 P.3d at 9 (suggesting the “time, place, and manner” of the defendant’s conduct influences whether it “disturb[s] the tranquility of the community”); cf. United States v. Guardado, 699 F.3d 1220, 1223 (10th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). Order and security are of obvious importance
holding that an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct traffic stop even when his suspicion that a law has been violated is based on a reasonable mistake of law holding that an officers reasonable mistake of law can give rise to the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify a traffic stop under the fourth amendment holding that an officers diligent pursuit of an investigation during the detention is a factor in determining the reasonableness of an investigatory stop holding that circumstances created reasonable suspicion for investigatory stop holding the location of an investigative stop is a factor that contributes to an officers reasonable suspicion