Presley, 204 So.3d at 85–86. The district court fully concurred with the unanimous en banc decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Aguiar v. State, 199 So.3d 920 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). Presley, 204 So.3d at 89.
Appellant argues the officer violated his Fourth Amendment rights by requiring him to stay at the scene of the traffic stop because the officer lacked reasonable suspicion that appellant was engaged in criminal activity. We agree with the reasoning of the en banc opinion of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Aguiar v. State, 199 So.3d 920 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016), rev. denied No. SC16–633, 2016 WL 3459769 (Fla. June 24, 2016), which held concerns for police officers' safety during a traffic stop outweigh the limited intrusion on passengers' rights by requiring them to remain at the scene for the reasonable duration of the traffic stop.
For one, such a conclusion fully squares with Arizona, where the Court solidified a police officer's authority-consistent with the Fourth Amendment-to detain a passenger for the duration of the traffic stop. Arizona, 555 U.S. at 333. Second, we find the reasoning in Aguiar v State, 199 So.3d 920 (Fla App, 2016), a factually similar case, to be persuasive. In Aguiar, a vehicle being stopped by the police pulled into a parking lot, and a passenger immediately exited the vehicle and started walking away.
Our holding in the instant case is consistent with, and supported by, the decisions and analyses of two of our sister courts who have also addressed this issue. See Presley v. State, 204 So.3d 84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (review granted, SC16–2089, oral argument held June 7, 2017); Aguiar v. State, 199 So.3d 920 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (en banc). Importantly, Wilson was decided in 1999, prior to the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Brendlin and Johnson.