(concurring in the result).
I agree with the statement in the dissent that "the probative evidence does not establish that defendant had abandoned his property, and, at most, defendant’s conduct was equivocal.”
Nonetheless, under the circumstances, with the stop being proper and the back of the cab now empty, and in view of the equivocal situation, good police work required that the officer open the bag that was on the floor of the back seat and, therefore, there was no violation.