declaration or not hearing you have to have oral testimony if there is some conflict between the defend and the officers i don't think you got  over the lane line one or two feet once and he came back in and went over the right line and with the number two lane one time he doesn't say over what period of time this was over what what distance this was and basically going declarations you can either understand it as is not addressing that question or as saying the opposite at that point you have to try are a fact in this instance seem to lot of conflict in the testimony i think that that he went to the to the next step that it really didn't matter at that whether this questioning occurred the officers had observed other behavior and observed the strong smell of air freshener there were other things that were into the equation and by the time the field sobriety test or they had determined that he was not under the influence well once they'd crewman he was not alone and then they detain him so that they didn't have the dog smell right well they detained him to ask an additional question about his route of travel they've smelled the air freshener they've noticed his extreme nervousness asked the odor of narcotics so you know it's not a lot your honor but you don't need a lot for reasonable suspicion and you really just need need some some particularize fact they have that particularized fact and where they go with that they sobriety test i don't think it matters whether before or after i think they had enough to ask those questions because of the air freshener smell there was a reasonable suspicion and there was a particular rise particularly that fact by the officers as to why they  questioning so i don't think it matters whether the officer determine when he starts to ask those questions whether or not applicant is intoxicated or not he's already smelled the air freshener before he ever gives the physical sobriety tests so it's guess it's a continuum here if you will your honor you have reasonable suspicion and you're trying to quickly dispel it this is question occurred over two or three minutes so he asked the question where are you travelling where you come in from where are you going and at that point happened gives the the apple next nervous was hard and says no at that point then the officer fired and in additional detention to go get the dog out of the car have the dog you know circle the truck and then when the dog hit there was probable cause to search the vehicle air freshener alone would be sufficient you know again i think that that that for it's a continuum depending on the amount of detention and what's going on there could have sat there for an hour and questioned him based on the air fresheners i don't think so but could he ask him a couple of  the declaration from the defendant says the opposite why would you with that i think i think then you have to decide whether or not the air freshener allows the additional question so you would agree that we don't have to that we would wash out that information i think that's right your honor i think you decide that the air freshener alone allows one more question and then when that question is answered of based on the words we would find clearly erroneous the judge's ruling the fact there that the order that the questions were asked in the opposite order i think that's right