People v. Raoult CA2/6

DISCUSSION

The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally, a nonconsensual search is only reasonable if it is made pursuant to a warrant. (Riley, supra, __ U.S.__ [134 S.Ct. 2473, 2482].) But warrantless searches may be reasonable under established exceptions. (Ibid.) One such exception is a search incident to lawful arrest. (Ibid.) It allows officers to search (1) an arrestee's person and the area within his or her immediate control to protect officer safety and preserve evidence (id. at p. 2483; Chimel v. California (1969) 395 U.S. 752, 762-763); and (2) the passenger compartment of an arrestee's vehicle when it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found there, for the sole purpose of gathering evidence (Riley, at p. __ [at pp. 2484, 2492]; Arizona v. Gant (2009) 556 U.S. 332, 350). Gonzales reasonably believed that evidence of drug possession might be found in the camera's digital storage because drug users and dealers commonly photograph their drugs and paraphernalia. When Gonzales arrested Raoult, California law held that the scope of a search incident to lawful arrest extends to the…