State v. Whipple, 2017 Ohio 1094

Loss-prevention supervisor observed Whipple take a $14.99 belt, put it on, and exit Meijer without paying; he tracked Whipple and reported the theft to police.
Officer Davila arrived, saw Whipple with a green backpack by a cart corrall, handcuffed him, and read Miranda rights; the supervisor identified Whipple and said Whipple was wearing the stolen belt.
Officer Davila lifted Whipple’s shirt, recovered the belt with price tags attached, removed the backpack from Whipple to place him in cuffs, and searched Whipple and the backpack for weapons and other stolen goods.
Inside the backpack Officer Davila found a cigarette pack containing foil with a white powdery substance, which he believed to be narcotics.
Whipple was indicted for theft and aggravated possession; he moved to suppress evidence from the backpack. The trial court found the arrest supported a search of Whipple’s person but suppressed the backpack evidence as outside his immediate control.
The state appealed; the court of appeals reversed, holding the backpack search was a lawful search incident to arrest and the scope (including opening the cigarette pack) was permissible.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the warrantless search of Whipple’s backpack lawful as a search incident to arrest?	The backpack was within Whipple’s immediate control at the time of arrest; removal and contemporaneous search are valid.	Although Whipple initially had the backpack, he was handcuffed and the backpack was a few feet away when searched; not within immediate control.	Search was lawful: backpack was controlled at encounter start, removed only to handcuff, and searched contemporaneously with arrest.
Did the search exceed permissible scope (i.e., inspecting containers within the backpack such as a cigarette pack)?	Officer could examine containers found during a lawful search incident to arrest; no further justification required.	After finding no weapons or stolen merchandise, further search of internal containers was beyond scope.	Search scope was reasonable; once a lawful search occurred, inspection of containers (e.g., cigarette pack) is permitted under Robinson.

Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (search incident to lawful arrest limited to arrestee and area within immediate control)
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (search incident to arrest of a vehicle limited to when arrestee is within reaching distance or vehicle may contain evidence of the offense)
United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (a lawful custodial arrest justifies a search of the person and containers found on the person without additional justification)
California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (addresses automobile searches and abrogation aspects related to container searches)
United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1 (discusses timing and scope of searches incident to arrest)
State v. Mathews, 46 Ohio St.2d 72 (Ohio Supreme Court upheld search of purse carried by arrestee)
State v. Adams, 144 Ohio St.3d 429 (discussion recognizing reachability analysis analogous to Gant in certain contexts)