For an arrest, the officer must have probable cause. State v. Barner, 6th Dist. Wood No. WD-01-034, 2002 WL 737065 (Apr. 26, 2002). For an investigatory stop, the officer must have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is occurring.
" State v. Shepard (1997), 122 Ohio App.3d 358, 364.' State v. Barner (Apr. 26, 2002), 6th Dist. No. WD-01-034." State v. Beeley, ¶ 15.
State v. Sanders (1998), 130 Ohio App.3d 789, 794. Reasonable suspicion is `* * * something more than an inchoate or unparticularized suspicion or hunch, but less than the level of suspicion required for probable cause.' State v. Shepard (1997), 122 Ohio App.3d 358, 364." State v. Barner (Apr. 26, 2002), 6th Dist. No. WD-01-034. {¶ 16}Turner specifically held that, "after smelling the odor of alcohol on a driver," an officer does not act unreasonably or intrusively by conducting field sobriety tests.