People v. Nottoli, 199 Cal. App. 4th 531

suppression granted; complaints against Reid and Barry dismissed; prosecutions sought reinstatement under Penal Code §871.5; issue focused on warrantless searches of Reid’s vehicle and cell phone post-traffic stop; deputy’s vehicle inventory and subsequent searches were at issue; hearing included testimony on validity of searches and the arrest for being under the influence; magistrate found cell phone search improper and suppressed it, leading to dismissal; on appeal, People contended searches were lawful under Gant and related precedents; court conducted de novo review of suppression ruling and held the suppression was erroneous; case remanded for reinstatement of complaints; separate case for Reid’s death abated proceedings but opinion retained for public interest

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a vehicle search incident to arrest was permissible under Gant	People argued vehicle search valid under Gant because evidence of arrest offense could be found in vehicle	Reid contended no basis to search vehicle as arrestee secured; no evidence in passenger compartment	Yes; search justified under Gant as to vehicle and containers
Whether the cell phone search was permissible as part of the vehicle search under Gant	People urged that cell phone was a container within passenger compartment and may contain relevant evidence	Reid argued cell phone not within scope of inventory or vehicle search	Yes; cell phone search upheld under Gant as within passenger compartment/containers
Whether the cell phone search could be sustained as a valid inventory search	People claimed inventory procedures justified viewing contents of the phone	Reid’s phone lacked standardized inventory policy applicability; opening not justified by inventory rules	No; cell phone search not valid as part of an inventory search under Opperman/Florida v. Wells
Standing to challenge the cell phone search	Barry challenged as having a legitimate expectation of privacy in Reid’s phone contents	Barry forfeited standing issue for not raising at suppression hearing	Barry forfeited standing issue; nonetheless cell phone search upheld on merits

Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (U.S. 2009) (limits vehicle searches incident to arrest to certain conditions; requires reasonable basis for finding evidence in vehicle)
Belton, 453 U.S. 460 (U.S. 1981) (search of passenger compartment incident to arrest; containers within reach may be searched)
Thornton, 541 U.S. 615 (U.S. 2004) (extends Belton to recent occupants of a vehicle; arrestee may need access considerations)
Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1973) (bright-line rule for search incident to lawful custodial arrest; scope independent of arrest probability)
Chimel, 395 U.S. 752 (U.S. 1969) (established limits of search incident to arrest to area within arrestee’s immediate control)
New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (U.S. 1981) (foundational Belton rule for vehicle, containers within passenger compartment)
Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (U.S. 1976) (inventory search validity when conducted according to police procedure)
Diaz, 51 Cal.4th 84 (Cal. 2011) (California aid in treating cell phones like other containers; no special status on privacy grounds)
U.S. v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (U.S. 1982) (scope of searches under automobile exception)