california officials on a consent to search the premises in relationship to a licensing issue automatic weapons but the court of the circuit court found that there were special limitations i when the government attained centuries by misrepresenting the scope of nature for the purpose of a government's investigation in this case the issue was that  time was he advised of the scope of nature or purpose of the investigation i think basically the stop was made because of a traffic occupation but in fact the true purpose was that they had been following this man for ten sorry i think they did radio and get some information at the time that they stopped the individual they had the vehicle registration they didn't know that man was actually driving the vehicle would have been fine so you're  to search and i think the court misapplied the standard for probably cause to arrest versus probable cause to search and i would suggest that the probable cause to search is different that the court had to consider not only about you know that you think you think these police officers don't have any spare instant i just see these people driving up to another car and it's just the way things happen in the world it's very strange i the and to be clear i believe that the record states the defendant is either on parole or probation in nevada they are joined together and supervised by one agency i'm not sure that makes a difference but that the record doesn't specifically say which of those ideas that came as the as they were calling to have a patrol officer stop the defendant sergeant chavez was running the license plate and that is when the daunce hit came up the dangerous offenders notification system and the record describes what that is officer venable who with the patrol officer who did the stop learned of it still the officers learned a second time through officer bangle after he contacted mr dillon and got his information he confirmed that the registered owner was mr dillon and that the registered owner in mr dillon where that was the one that had the parole or probation supervision occurred although mr don't claim to was the other guy but he confirmed that something happened so that is the basis of first second and i agree with you just knew and that there was clearly reasonable suspicion if not probable cause t pattern of driving to a parking lot like a chevron and having the other individual get in and they get out very quickly with identical identical to the prior drug transactions so i believe that creates suspicion but it goes further then follow the car to go further evidence of drug trafficking activity so that was an alternate basis for the stop and for the search of the car under the automobile exception when you add in all the other information that officer bangle found plus the fact that he was on parole or probation i think there was more than enough stand for a proposition that the government doesn't disagree with and that is that a government agent can't pretend that they're not involved in a criminal investigation and that the consent to is the subject of that in order to trick them into gaining consent but in this case that's not what happened in fact again the magistrate judge found that one of the purposes for requesting consent to search was to investigate for a weapons that member officer bangle was not a narcotics officer a patrol officer and after seeing that darn the magistrate judge found an officer bengal testified that he wanted to see if the guy had weapons and in fact he saw what might have been a weapon when he when mr dylan got out of the car he saw that large screwdriver there and he was concerned because it was right where a driver could grab it he thought that might be a weapon that mr dillon was using and so his request to search for weapons was not some roof that's a legitimate purpose there's no case that the fence lights or that the government  find a police officer must disclose every single crime he's investigating when requesting consent to search and here the scope was carefully limited to only areas in the car where a weapon no one certain terms face occleve that he's checking to make sure he's not committing a crime that is a violation of his probation or parole so mr dillon was on notice was told he had a right to refuse this request and did so knowing that if evidence was found i would only stress the fact that i think the basi decision is controlling in this matter i think the nature of the scope and the purpose of the stop in the search was never explained to the fan and to suggest that these opposition merely stopped it inserted because of the