State v. Daniels

[¶ 29] I respectfully dissent.

[¶ 30] I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the evidence obtained from the search of Daniels’ purse should have been suppressed. Although the cited cases as presented in the majority opinion appear to support the majority’s conclusion, a closer examination of those cases and other Fourth Amendment jurisprudence reveals a different result is necessary.

[¶ 31] The majority correctly concludes the scope of a warrantless search incident to arrest can be different from the scope of a search conducted after law enforcement obtains consent. See People v.…