With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". was inadmissible, the Third District held that the stop was nevertheless proper because there was a reasonable suspicion that the truck was speeding based on the officer’s visual and aural perceptions. Id. at 947-48. Similarly, in Eady, 538 So.2d at 97, the officer heard the vehicle’s tires screeching and heard the vehicle’s gear shift, and he testified that the vehicle appeared to be traveling at a high rate of speed. The court held that the officer’s visual and aural perceptions supported his reasonable suspicion that the vehicle was traveling too fast under the circumstances. Id. Other states have also concluded that an officer’s observations of a vehicle may provide reasonable suspicion that the vehicle is speeding. State v. Barnhill, 166 N.C.App. 228, 601 S.E.2d 215, 218 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Taylor v. Wimes, 10 Neb.App. 432, 632 N.W.2d

A: holding that a truck drivers injury from a fall in the shower of a truck stop while off duty was not compensable
B: holding truck lessors liability to truck lessee existed without parties express indemnity clause in lease thus exclusion was inapplicable where carolina casualty alleged its insured truck lessor was precluded from coverage because lessors liability was assumed under contract with truck lessee
C: holding that officers had objective probable cause to search the pocket of a jacket found on the seat of the defendants truck where the discovery of marijuana in two different locations in the truck combined with the defendants possession of marijuana reasonably led officers to believe that other caches would be found elsewhere in the vehicle
D: holding that officers observations of the speed of the truck coupled with the sound of the engine racing and the bouncing of the truck as it passed through the intersection gave officer probable cause to believe that truck was exceeding a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions
D.