This case is again before us for proceedings not inconsistent with Colorado v. Bannister, — U.S. -,
The Supreme Court of the United States, in its reversal, determined that Chambers v. Maroney,
In People v. Bannister, supra, we held that while a plain view sighting of contraband, or other evidence of a crime in an automobile may be sufficient to establish probable cause to obtain a warrant, the search of the automobile, and the seizure of evidence, could not be carried out without a search warrant. This determination was in accordance with our holdings in People v. Hicks,
Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court and now reverse the ruling of the district court which suppressed the evidence seized from defendant, Peter Rodney Bannister’s automobile.
Notes
. We note that the holding of Colorado v. Bannister, supra, is consistent with our holdings in People v. Coulson,
