A reasonable officer could have credited this testimony. See, e.g., United States v. Dekattu, No. 18-CR-474, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37999, at *9 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2019) (Ross, J.) (collecting cases).

Dkt. 151-3, pp. 10-11, 15-16. Those facts put together afforded Wright reasonable suspicion that defendant posed a danger See, e.g. , United States v. Dekattu , 2019 WL 1091384, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2019) (noting that reasonable suspicion is highly fact-bound, but that agitation in course of police with other indicia of danger meets standard). Wright therefore had the appropriate level of articulable suspicion to detain defendant for his and Williams’ safety, and did not improperly extend the traffic stop in violation of Rodriguez .

Garcia , 279 F. Supp. 2d 294, 300 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) ("After opening the door and observing [the defendant] making furtive movements in an apparent attempt to conceal a ‘bulge’ in his waist area ... [the officer] was justified in patting [the defendant] down to determine whether he was carrying a weapon."); Padilla , 548 F.3d at 183 (finding reasonable suspicion that a suspect was armed when the suspect "reach[ed] underneath his jacket and shirt, adjust[ing] something in the center of his waistband" that "appeared to have some weight to it because of the way it shifted and the way [the defendant] moved his hand"); United States v. Manuel , 64 F. App'x 823, 826-27 (2d Cir. 2003) ("Upon concluding that the stop was lawful, we find that [the officer's] frisk was justified, because the bulge in [the defendant's] waist area permitted him to conclude ... was armed and posed a danger to the officers.") (citing Pennsylvania v. Mimms , 434 U.S. 106, 111-12, 98 S.Ct. 330, 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977) ); United States v. Dekattu , No. 18-CR-0474, 2019 WL 1091384, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2019) ("Courts have regularly found that physical movements indicative of carrying a concealed firearm can contribute to a finding of reasonable suspicion."). In this rapidly unfolding set of events, officers observed three violations of the law—the public drinking, the vehicle infraction and the marijuana—and were justified in approaching the defendant and directing him out of the car.

"[T]he apparent adjustment of a concealed firearm" coupled with factors such as presence in a high-crime area has been deemed a sufficient basis for an investigative stop. United States v. Padilla, 548 F.3d 179, 189 (2d Cir. 2008) (holding that defendant's body movement, which the arresting officer testified was "consistent with the adjustment of a concealed firearm" based on his "eight to ten arrests of armed individuals observed to make the same movement" conferred reasonable suspicion for stop and frisk); accord United States v. Rodriguez, 727 F. App'x 725, 728 (2d Cir. 2018) (holding that, despite innocent justifications provided by defense counsel, defendant's movements, which became suspicious when he continued them for a long time, "established an articulable suspicion of having a weapon in the waistband area of the trousers and the body"); see alsoUnited States v. Dekattu, No. 1:18-CR-0474, 2019 WL 1091384, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2019) (finding reasonable suspicion where the defendant "was observed in a 'high crime area,' behaving nervously and appearing to carry a concealed firearm, and when the police approached him, he reacted in an agitated and evasive manner"). Similarly, the Second Circuit has upheld a finding of reasonable suspicion based in part on a suspect "looking around nervously over his shoulders."