In Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997), a vehicle was stopped for not having a license tag as well as other reasons. During the course of the stop, the passenger was ordered out of the vehicle by the police officer. As the passenger exited the vehicle, a quantity of crack cocaine fell to the ground. The passenger was arrested and prosecuted for pos session of cocaine. Defendant sought to suppress the evidence against him on the grounds that the trooper's act in ordering him out of the car was an unreasonable seizure. The trial court granted the motion and was affirmed by the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. See State v. Wilson, 106 Md. App. 24, 664 A.2d 1, cert. denied 340 Md. 502, 667 A.2d 342 (1995). The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the decision of the Maryland state courts. The Supreme Court held that an officer making a traffic stop, "may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop." 519 U.S. at 415. The issue in Maryland v. Wilson, was whether an officer could order the passenger in a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation out of the vehicle without violating the passenger's Fourth Amendment rights in the absence of any reason to suspect the passenger of wrongdoing. The issue was not whether the stop of the vehicle was unlawful or unlawfully prolonged. The Supreme Court concluded that concerns for officer safety outweighed the passengers interest in personal liberty because, as a practical matter, the passenger was already stopped and the only change in circumstance was that the passenger now had to wait outside of the vehicle for completion of the stop. ( Id. at pp. 413-414.) The Court noted that "the motivation of a passenger to employ violence to prevent apprehension ... is every bit as great as that of the driver," and held that "an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop." (Supra, at 414, 415.) The Court specifically noted that "the additional intrusion on the passenger is minimal." (Supra, at 415.) The United States Supreme Court held that "an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop." Id. at 415. The Court reasoned that: danger to an officer from a traffic stop is likely to be greater when there are passengers in addition to the driver in the stopped car. While there is not the same basis for ordering the passengers out of the car as there is for ordering the driver out, the additional intrusion on the passenger is minimal. Wilson, 519 U.S. at 414-15. In Wilson, the Court extended its holding in Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 54 L. Ed. 2d 331, 98 S. Ct. 330 (1977) (per curiam), that "a police officer may as a matter of course order the driver of a lawfully stopped car to exit his vehicle," to passengers of the vehicle. Wilson, 519 U.S. at 410. The Court in Wilson found that the "same weighty interest in officer safety is present regardless of whether the occupant of the stopped car is a driver or passenger." Id. at 413. The Supreme Court held that ordering Wilson out was justified by officer safety considerations and reversed the suppression of the cocaine, stating: "Danger to an officer from a traffic stop is likely to be greater when there are passengers in addition to the driver in the stopped car. While there is not the same basis for ordering the passengers out of the car as there is for ordering the driver out, the additional intrusion on the passenger is minimal. We therefore hold that an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop." (Maryland v. Wilson, supra, 519 U.S. at pp. 414-415.)