P.v . Matthews
Here, police officers arrested defendant and his girlfriend in a motel room for being under the influence. Defendant was placed in a patrol car, and his girl friend was handcuffed in the room. While she was in the custody of one officer, the other seized a mans hat that was on the floor and then searched inside it, finding contraband. The trial court denied a motion to suppress finding that the search came within the exception to the warrant requirement established in Chimel v. California (1969) 395 U.S. 752 (Chimel) for a search incident to an arrest. We reverse. As the United States Supreme Court recently made clear in Arizona v. Gant (2009) 556 U.S. ___ [192 S.Ct. 1710; 173 L.Ed.2d 485] (Gant), the exception for a search incident to an arrest is based on actual need to prevent an arrestee from obtaining a weapon or destroying evidence. Where, as here, there is no reasonable possibility that the arrestee can do so at the time an object or area is searched, the exception is simply inapplicable.
Comments on P.v . Matthews