With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Timothy Reid was convicted of possession of cocaine following his no contest plea. He appeals, challenging the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress the cocaine. We affirm, because the police officer lawfully seized the cocaine after discovering it in plain view when appellant was ordered out of his vehicle during the course of a lawful traffic stop for obstructing traffic. The trial court properly determined that appellant’s conduct in parking his vehicle in the roadway near an intersection and causing another vehicle to drive around appellant’s vehicle provided probable cause for the traffic stop. The facts in this case show an intent to impede or hinder the free flow of traffic, thus distinguishing this case from Underwood v. State, 801 So.2d 200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (<HOLDING>). Here, because the deputy had probable cause

A: holding that the stop of defendants vehicle was unlawful where officers stopped the vehicle to check the license and registration but had observed no suspicious activity
B: holding that the arresting officer did not have probable cause to stop the defendant for obstructing traffic because there was no evidence of intent to impede or hinder traffic where the vehicle was only briefly stopped in the roadway and the officer approaching the vehicle from behind did not have to stop or drive around the defendants vehicle
C: holding that a conclusion that reasonable suspicion supported the stop of a vehicle was subsumed within the trial courts ruling that the officer had probable cause for the stop
D: holding that an officer may order a passenger out of a vehicle during a stop for a traffic infraction
B.