Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): J. Appellant believe that a traffic infraction had occurred, his stop of appellant’s car was permissible. See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 810, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Holland v. State, 696 So.2d 757, 759 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that an officer may order a passenger out of a vehicle during a stop for a traffic infraction (B) holding that probable cause to believe the traffic code had been violated rendered the stop reasonable under the fourth amendment regardless of officers subjective intent (C) holding that a traffic stop is valid under the fourth amendment if the stop is based on an observed traffic violation or if the police officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a traffic or equipment violation has occurred or is occurring (D) holding this framework applies whether the traffic stop is based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion (E) holding that a traffic stop is reasonable under the fourth amendment when police have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction has occurred
Output (English): holding that probable cause to believe the traffic code had been violated rendered the stop reasonable under the fourth amendment regardless of officers subjective intent