With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". analysis and the reasonable expectation analysis, we conclude that our statements in Conrad, 63 Wis. 2d at 627, 630-31, may be read as inconsistent with that distinction. However, if we are to employ the same trespassory, curtilage analysis to a seizure as has been applied to a search, we must consider separate and distinct from a reasonable expectation of privacy whether the area in question is constitutionally protected curtilage. ¶ 31. We previously have conducted a curtilage analysis to determine whether an arrest occurring within curtilage of a home violates the Fourth Amendment's protection against warrantless entry. Walker, 154 Wis. 2d at 182. In Walker, police entered a resident's fenced-in backyard without a warrant in order to arrest him. Id. In determining w pp. 1994) (<HOLDING>). We now turn to the discussion of whether the

A: holding that fourth amendment not violated when officer makes custodial arrest for driving without a seatbelt
B: holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment
C: holding that arrest in backyard violated fourth amendment
D: holding a fourth amendment terry detention is not a custodial arrest and the use of handcuffs does not automatically convert a temporary detention into a fourth amendment arrest
C.