Bellizzi

Appellant Joseph Bellizzi contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence, in this prosecution for possession of cocaine for purposes of sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.) We conclude the trial court wrongly found exigent circumstances supported the legality of the warrantless search. We, therefore, reverse.

I. Facts and Procedural History

Appellant, a resident of Hawaii, checked into the Radisson Hotel in South San Francisco, paying cash in advance. He refused to allow maids into his room to provide maid service. When a maid did finally enter in order to clean up the room while appellant was out, she found among the bedclothes some clear plastic baggies with a white substance inside. The maid informed the hotel management, which informed the local police.

The police contacted a deputy district attorney, who apparently thought there was an insufficient basis for securing a search warrant, and who suggested the officers should simply investigate and contact appellant to discuss the situation. The officers also contacted police in Hawaii, who told them that appellant was a suspected drug dealer.

Two plainclothes officers, including Officer…