Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
justified by a reasonable suspicion of driving under the influence); cf. Wilder v. Turner, 490 F.3d 810, 815 (10th Cir.2007) (“A field sobriety test is a minor intrusion on a driver only requiring a reasonable suspicion of intoxication and an easy opportunity to end a detention before it matures into an arrest.” (quotation omitted)). The record also does not demonstrate that the underlying reasonable suspicion had dissipated prior to the field sobriety tests. Although the district court found that the evidence regarding Amundsen’s behavior during the stop did not provide additional evidence of impairment, the court’s findings do not demonstrate that Amundsen’s conduct dispelled Jones’s earlier suspicions of intoxication. Cf. United States v. McSwain, 29 F.3d 558, 561-62 (10th Cir.1994) ; Millan-Diaz, 975 F.2d at 722 (holding that an
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an officer violated the fourth amendment because the reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation regarding a temporary registration sticker completely dissipated when the officer approached the car and determined the sticker was valid
B. holding that a traffic stop is valid under the fourth amendment if the stop is based on an observed traffic violation or if the police officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a traffic or equipment violation has occurred or is occurring
C. holding that under the fourth amendment the motive of the officer when stopping a vehicle for a minor traffic infraction whether subjective or objective is completely irrelevant
D. holding that a police officer may stop a driver where the officer has a reasonable and articulable suspicion regarding the commission of a civil traffic violation
E. holding that an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct traffic stop even when his suspicion that a law has been violated is based on a reasonable mistake of law
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.