Police officers received a tip from a reliable informant that a night club was operating a drug distribution business out of the basement in the building where the club was located. During a police surveillance of the building, the officers observed a patron leaving the club by the basement stairs and placing what appeared to be a weapon inside his raincoat. The officers stopped the patron on the street who denied that he was ever in the basement of the night club. At that point the officer, fearing for his safety, patted down the outer clothing and felt small tube-shaped vials in the defendant's shirt pocket. The defendant was placed under arrest. The substance in the vials field-tested positive for cocaine. The defendant filed a motion to suppress the cocaine. At the suppression hearing, the arresting officer testified that based on his 20 years of experience, he concluded that the tube-shaped objects were glass vials used by drug dealers to sell narcotics. If the court believes the officer's testimony, should the evidence of the cocaine be suppressed? (A) No, because the stop was reasonable in duration and the officer had a reasonable suspicion that the defendant was armed and dangerous. (B) No, because the officer had probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed. (C) Yes, because the scope of a pat down in a Terry stop is limited to a search for weapons. (D) Yes, because the informant supplied no information about the patron to police before the stop