doubt the hill you have to climb it seems to me is to distinguish the family back in garcia from the fact fact here correct your honor and i conceded in my brief that despite stop which is reasonable at its exaction might become unreasonable because of the scope for the intensity of the search and that's exactly what happened here as the court search in part based upon the fact that as the opera service drove up alongside mr mundane he appeared to reach into his clothing he was wearing loose clothing which was another factor  by officer bark to justify the curry stop when he was stopped the backpack that he was wearing was removed for the sole purpose of allowing the opera service to put both of his hands behind his back to do the form of a pat down that the police officers in las vegas conducted that pat down produced no weapons the backpack and been placed on the hood of the patrol car this is at approximately twelve twenty in the morning it also is approximately in front of mr mundaneness house located on of boulevard in the city of las vegas after finding nothing on mr mundane and the only ways in for the stop was that they sighted she walked by he looked into their car he appeared to look into another car and he walked around an apartment building and paine backed out and then continued walking down the same street he had been at so the question is did at officer which leiter put in a report within a couple of hours later the police officer then tells us through his testimony that he decided after mr mundane or the spontaneous utterance there's only clothing in the backpack the officer reached over started to slide it and according to him the backpack felt heavier than clothing progeny have all held that the illicit knife sure of what felt during a pat pat down must be readily apparent what this officer felt was something hard to prevent boots which in fact are common clothing in the city of las vegas particularly for young males who might be working construction at that point the officer and zipped the backpack and went into it where he felt inside enclosed in a t shirt enclosed with an i leather holster he felt the the butt or the grip of a revolver how does this differ from garcia it differs yana because garcia off the officer had been involved in a high speed chase of an individual on a motorcycle and one officer in this case there were two officers that stopping garcia ended on a dark deserted highway mr garcia you had a fanny pack open on his  five motorbike when the officer felt that he said something like this feels like money not something illegal at which point mr garcia you know immediately took off running and was l handed when they opened that it was currency in there and other contraband i believe that case really turned on the question of abandonment not on a bad a backpack or a funny pack in that instance so contrary to the government's position that case is easily distinguishable from this case the acos are after in this case opening the backpack conducting the search then went back headed towards mr mundane who are unfortunately fled the scene at that point leaving not the brightest move leaving his valid i d with this home of grass in the op was theirs was ashen and of course the backpack and its contents the case here rather than being like garcia it's more like minnesota versus dickerson that was the case where in the officer felt something in the pocket after a pat down search reached into the pocket and retrieved it that is  what happened here the a parent nights you up feeling something hard in a backpack does not lead to a reasonable inference that it is a weapon or that tool is presently dangerous what this officer was doing and i i have no doubt from the record they were out investigating according to their testimony a series of auto br cans in that neighborhood what the officer said when i asked was mr mundane or free to go after the initial pat down his response was no we were still conducting an investigation that investigation was to look for the fruits of some crime while they were it was auto bar glory residential burglary or who knows why this was a valid stop and frisk there was no reasonable apprehension watched least two officers had determined that mr mundane no was lawfully an obscenity of his own home he had committed no crime he had no weapons on him which was where again as i said the officers may have had a reasonable suspicion to search it would place a court i'd like to cite the rest of my time for rebuttal so let me just ask you a question extended beyond autos it was held at a any place that a suspect might reasonably reach and in that context it was within the passenger compartment of a officers in my search for their own protection normally when a car stop is conducted the office or approaches the vehicle the individuals in the vehicle that's one distinction there where he has ready access just like within a home perhaps they might be able to search the sulfa but the parson setting on while they're interviewing him because it's within his ready range quite frankly the officers testimony in this case that to police are armed police officers feared for their safety because they thought that this one young man could leap prove them that the long case is a valid holding but even they are it's still going back to terry requires the reasonable apprehension on the part of the police officer that they might be able to reach for a weapon there was not that reasonable apprehension here nor was it reasonable in this case to believe that mr mcveigh you know could have reached for and would create a weapon thank  backpack that has been on the defendant's person in long the holding was very clear officers have a right to examine hiding places where a weapon can be concealed that a suspect officers that language is broad and it was not confined in the supreme court's decision to the vehicle the factual setting that was presented there the permissible scope of the first then  the search for weapons we have the supreme court issuing a broad holding which suggests that police officers have a right to look for weapons to protect themselves we have a panel in this course garcia applying along and allowing officers to search a fanny pack that said it sat on a motorcycle near a defendant's the question was will the first question your hon well how do you distinguish garcia from this case i would submit to your honor that you cannot see if anything we have a fanny pack open on a motorcycle fanny pack being much smaller than a backpack the chance of there being a weapon in a fanny pack is actually considerably smaller than there being a weapon in a backpack especially when you are in an area of las vegas where a number of auto theft auto burglaries had occurred it's after midnight the for those reasons and at this point i'm inclined to sit down or take any questions it seems to me that given the officers right to protect themselves and look for weapons in a bag that what they did was merely an extension of their terry stop and so according to the record the officers place mr medina up against the hood of the car he set the backpack down on the hood they did a  pat down of him the officer then walked around to the other side of the car to protect himself pulled the bag over felt that it was heavy realized the defendant had lied to him about there only being close inside and felt the outside of the bag in which he felt a hard metallic objects and which point in the interest of protecting himself and his partner he reached into the bag lo and behold he found a three fifty seven magnum which was stolen for those reasons i would suggest that  garcia is not at all distinguishable this court has recognized that police officers and conduct searches to protect themselves of areas that are in the immediate vicinity of a defendant ok thank you for your argument thank both sides for their argument the case to start it will be submitted for decision and will proceed to the next case on the calendar for argument which is hauser against