Snider

This case was certified for transfer to this court under rule 63 of the California Rules of Court, after the Appellate Department of San Joaquin County Superior Court ruled that the municipal court should have granted defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. Defendant is charged with use of heroin, a misdemeanor (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550).

*562 I

The following “Settled Statement of Facts on Appeal” was endorsed by the municipal court:

Defendant contends that'the examination of his eyes was a search without probable cause, that the “plain view” doctrine does not apply, and that People v. Benedict (1969) 2 Cal.App.3d 400 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 759 ], and People v. Ochoa (1970) 9 Cal.App.3d 500 [ 88 Cal.Rptr. 399 ], are not controlling.

*565 II

In People v. Benedict, supra, 2 Cal.App.3d 400 , the officer asked the defendant for identification, then directed a flashlight into the defendant’s eyes. He observed constricted pupils which did not react to light. The court concluded that this was “[a] phenomenon ... in plain sight of the officer and observed by him without any semblance of a search or seizure', his use of a flashlight to observe the pupillaiy reaction was not…