Court Opinion

ID: 9776190
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:23:09.22079+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:35.642934
License: Public Domain

*618Brown, J.
¶14 (dissenting) — Lisa Byrd was sitting in the passenger side of her car when Officer Jeff Ely approached to arrest her for investigation of the stolen license plate on her car. Ms. Byrd’s purse was in her lap. Officer Ely ordered her out of the car and removed her purse from her lap. After he arrested her and placed her in a patrol car, he searched the purse for contraband and weapons and found contraband. I do not see how this violates Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009) or the principles we enunciated in State v. Johnson, 155 Wn. App. 270, 229 P.2d 824, review denied, 170 Wn.2d 1006 (2010).
¶15 Certainly, under Gant, the purse was within Ms. Byrd’s reach and could even be described as on her person, not only at the stop but at the time of arrest. This case, like Johnson, is much like State v. Smith, 119 Wn.2d 675, 678, 835 P.2d 1025 (1992), where Mr. Smith’s fanny pack fell off during the arrest process and was determined to have been lawfully seized and searched. Here, automobile registration evidence may have been found in Ms. Byrd’s purse bearing on the stolen license plates. The purse search was temporally as "contemporaneous” in Ms. Byrd’s case as was the search in Smith. After all, an officer cannot perform all arrest functions simultaneously.
¶16 I would reverse the order suppressing Ms. Byrd’s purse, and I see no reason to disapprove Johnson. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
Review granted at 173 Wn.2d 1001 (2011).