With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". behavior was consistent with methamphetamine use, his subjective belief — that defendant’s methamphetamine use provided a sufficient basis for concluding that she presently possessed methamphetamine — was not objectively reasonable. Although “‘reasonable suspicion’ is a relatively low barrier[,]” State v. Jones, 245 Or App 186, 192, 263 P3d 344 (2011), and “[c]ertainty about the significance of particular facts is not required for a police officer to hold a reasonable belief that they indicate criminal conduct,” State v. Briggs, 229 Or App 660, 666, 212 P3d 1276 (2009), evidence of methamphetamine use, without more, does not give rise to reasonable suspicion that defendant presently possesses more methamphetamine. Cf. State v. Lavender, 93 Or App 361, 364, 762 P2d 1027 (1988) (<HOLDING>); State v. Morton, 151 Or App 734, 739, 951 P2d

A: holding among other things that the officers observations that the defendant was under the influence of a controlled substance without more did not establish probable cause to believe that the defendant had committed a crime
B: holding inter alia that experienced officers observations that the defendant was under the influence of either methamphetamine or cocaine did not by itself establish probable cause to believe that the defendant had committed a crime
C: holding that where other evidence established probable cause to believe that the defendant possessed controlled substances investigating officers had probable cause to search the defendants purse for similar evidence
D: holding police officer had probable cause to believe defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol
A.