In what circumstances will a police officer be privileged to shade the pupil area of a suspect's eyes?

In People v. Ochoa, supra, 9 Cal.App.3d 500, 88 Cal.Rptr. 399, the officer approached the defendant on the street after a tip from a reliable confidential informant that the defendant was dealing in narcotics. Noticing that the pupils of defendant's eyes were constricted, he placed his hand over them "to shadow the pupil area." (9 Cal.App.3d at p. 502, 88 Cal.Rptr. 399.) When the pupils did not react but remained constricted, the officer placed defendant under arrest for being under the influence of narcotics. The court held: "On these facts we do not have the slightest doubt that the officer was within his rights in arresting and searching defendant, and we would be belaboring the obvious if we cited authority for the proposition. We assume that when the officers first saw defendant they had no right to arrest him on the basis of the information they had received which was arguably somewhat stale. We also accept that, without more, (the officer) would not have been privileged to shade defendant's eyes. While having police officers approach one on the street and conduct such examinations in public is not as serious an intrusion as a pat down for weapons, it can be, to

Page 903