cf. State v. Ford, 2013 ME 96, ¶ 15, 82 A.3d 75 (explaining that "obvious error review is precluded when a defendant expressly waives a jury instruction" (quotation marks omitted)). This case is unlike State v. Wilcox, 2023 ME 10, ¶ 9 n.4, 288 A.3d 1200, in which the appellant advanced a position on appeal that was directly contrary to the position taken before the trial court. 2. Merits

Further, the Law Court has held that "a brief detention of a driver to" subject the driver to field sobriety tests is permitted if an officer has "a reasonable articulable suspicion of impairment ." State v. Wilcox, 2023 ME 10, ¶ 16, 288 A.3d 1200 (internal quotation marks omitted).

The other cases he cites support the opposite conclusion. See State v. Wilcox, 288 A.3d 1200, 1207 (Me. 2023), cert. denied, 143 S.Ct. 2666 (2023) (“[O]nly a reasonable articulable suspicion of intoxication was required to conduct field sobriety testing.”);