SEARCHERS OF PERSONS AND CARS ARE ALSO CONSIDERED. MOST COURTROOM CHALLENGES BY MOTORISTS TO POLICE ACTIVITIES OCCUR WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE OBTAINED AS THE RESULT OF IMPROPER CONDUCT. REASONABLENESS UNDER NEW YORK'S STOP-AND-FRISK STATUTE IS EXAMINED IN RELATION TO: (1) THE DE BOUR DOCTRINE WHICH SPECIFIES RIGHTS OF POLICE OFFICERS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION OR TAKE PERSONS INTO CUSTODY WHEN THERE IS SUSPICION OF A TRAFFIC VIOLATION, CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, OR THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING; AND (2) JUSTIFICATION FOR WARRANTLESS SEARCHERS OF MOTORISTS AND VEHICLES (PLAIN VIEW CONCEPT, SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST FOR TRAFFIC INFRACTION, SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST BASED ON PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE DRIVER HAS COMMITTED A CRIME, PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE CAR CONTAINS CONTRABAND OR EVIDENCE OF CRIME, AND NEED TO INVENTORY CONTENTS OF IMPOUNDED VEHICLE). THE ANALYSIS OF CASE LAW DEMONSTRATES THAT CONSTITUTIONAL NORMS IN POLICE-MOTORIST CONFRONTATIONS ARE COMPLEX AND DIFFICULT TO APPLY IN FAST-DEVELOPING FACTUAL SITUATIONS. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (DEP)