With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". pulled her vehicle to the side of the highway of her own volition and (2) police officers observed numerous signs of intoxication before they detained her. As did the trial court, we review the entire record to determine whether DMV’s order is supported by substantial evidence. ORS 813.450(4)(c). We conclude that it is and reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate DMV’s order. DMV suspended petitioner’s driving privileges after she was arrested for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) and refused to take a breath test. Petitioner timely requested a hearing to challenge the suspension. At the hearing, she argued that police officers unlawfully stopped her and that the suspension was therefore invalid. See Pooler v. MVD, 306 Or 47, 51-52, 755 P2d 701 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Officer Swafford, the arresting officer, was

A: holding that an initially lawful terry stop can be converted into a fullfledged arrest for which probable cause is required but noting that there is no bright line rule for determining when an investigatory stop crosses the line and becomes an arrest
B: holding that an arrest occurred despite an officers testimony that the accused was only detained prior to a breath test
C: holding that an unlawful stop may invalidate an ensuing arrest and that without a valid arrest there can be no request to take a breath test which may lead to a lawful suspension
D: holding that an officer may search a suspects vehicle incident to a lawful arrest
C.