So, I know all of you are smarter than Dr. Judge. Let's see if you can answer this bar question. A Tennessee officer pulls over a driver for a broken taillight. The officer asks the driver to step out and performs a pat-down. The officer feels a small, soft bag in the driver's pocket and discovers it contains drugs. The defense argues that the drugs should be suppressed. What's the most likely outcome? A, the drugs are admissible because the officer had the right to pat him down during a traffic stop. B, the drugs are admissible because they were found during a lawful stop. Or C, the drugs are suppressed because a soft bag does not feel like a weapon. Tick-tock, tick-tock, time is wasting. Answer below. The answer is obviously C. This is an inadmissible recovery of an item during a pat-down. Cops allowed to pull you over for a reasonable articulable suspicion. And when he gets you out of the car, he's allowed to pat you down for weapons. A small, soft, spongy item in your pocket, he might think in his head, "Hey, that's probably some marijuana." But he's not allowed to pull it out on a pat-down for weapons. He's only allowed to do that if he's allowed to search you. And he can't do that until you're under arrest for a criminal offense.