United States v. Parker, 458 F.Supp.3d 260

On Sept. 4, 2018, York PD conducted a controlled buy using a confidential informant (CS) who called a number tied to Travis Parker; officers observed a hand-to-hand exchange and the CS turned over a substance later tested as powder cocaine.
No arrest was made on Sept. 4; officers photographed and surveilled Parker and linked the phone number to him.
On Jan. 30, 2019, the same CS arranged another buy using the same number; officers staged a bust and arrested Parker when he arrived at the meeting location.
Incident to the on-scene arrest officers found cash (~$1,100) and a cellphone but no drugs; Parker was transported to the York County Drug Task Force office.
Two male officers conducted a visual strip search in a private locked room after officers, based on two informants, believed Parker commonly concealed drugs in his underwear or anal cavity; officers observed and removed a bag protruding from his anal cavity containing cocaine (powder and crack) and pills.
Parker moved to suppress evidence from the Jan. 30 arrest and searches; the court held a suppression hearing and denied the motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Jan. 30 warrantless public-arrest was supported by probable cause	Parker: arrest lacked probable cause; the government did not prove he committed/was committing a crime	Govt: controlled-buy setup, same CS/phone number, timing and surveillance created an objective basis to believe Parker was selling cocaine	Court: Probable cause existed; arrest lawful
Whether the routine search incident to arrest was lawful	Parker: evidence from searches incident to the arrest should be suppressed if arrest unlawful	Govt: search incident to a lawful arrest is reasonable under Robinson	Court: On-scene search incident to lawful arrest was reasonable and lawful
Whether the warrantless visual strip search at task-force office was reasonable	Parker: strip search was overly intrusive and required a warrant or higher suspicion	Govt: officers had reasonable suspicion (two informants, prior practice of concealing drugs, large cash/no drugs found); search performed privately by same-sex officers	Court: Strip search supported by specific and articulable facts raising reasonable suspicion (possibly probable cause); search was conducted reasonably; seizure admissible

District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018) (probable-cause standard for warrantless arrest evaluated objectively under totality of circumstances)
Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128 (1990) (Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures)
Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 (1964) (probable cause standard for arrests)
United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973) (search incident to lawful arrest doctrine)
Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014) (custodial status does not eliminate Fourth Amendment protections for searches)
Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013) (limits on searches of arrestees and balancing privacy interests)
Jiminez v. Wood County, 660 F.3d 841 (5th Cir. 2011) (strip searches incident to arrest require at least reasonable suspicion)
Hartline v. Gallo, 546 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2008) (strip search standards and need for particularized suspicion)
Evans v. Stephens, 407 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2005) (post-arrest investigatory strip searches without reasonable suspicion unconstitutional)
LePree v. United States, 434 F.2d 1034 (3d Cir. 1970) (strip search upheld where officers had reliable, specific information defendant hid contraband on his person)