Johndrell Elliott v. Ohio

I GIVEN A TRAFFIC STOP MADE BY THE STATE TROOPER, WHO WAS THE “DOG HANDLER” INVOLVED, WAS ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OF FINALIZING HIS TICKET WRITING, WHEN HE STOPS DOING SO AFTER JOINED BY OTHERS. HE THEN ORDERS THE PEOPLE OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND MAKE USE OF HIS DOG WHO THEN ALERTS: CAN THE DRUG OFFENSE ARREST BASED ON THESE FACTS SURVIVE RODRIGUEZ V. U.S., 135 S. CT. 1609 (2015)? II GIVEN THE REMOVAL OF THE MOTORIST AND HIS PASSENGER FROM THEIR VEHICLE (BY A TROOPER) WHO WAS IN THE FINAL PHASES OF WRITING A WARNING TICKET (HERE FOR A WINDOW TINT VIOLATION), WHICH RENDERED THE VEHICLE A LAWFULLY PARKED VEHICLE, BE SEARCHED WITHOUT A WARRANT? III WHERE THE TROOPER WHO WAS FINALIZING HIS WRITING OF A TICKET (FOR A TINT VIOLATION), IS JOINED BY OTHER TROOPERS, LITERALLY STOPS DOING SO TO ORDER THE PEOPLE OUT OF THE VEHICLE SO HE CAN MAKE USE OF HIS “DOG”: CAN THE USE OF THE DOG BE SAID TO BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN A WARRANTLESS SEARCH, WHICH REQUIRED PROBABLE CAUSE?