KS statute tracks Chimel on search incident, and cell phone search was unreasonable (even before Riley was decided)

Defendant was stopped for a headlight being out in 2009. He ended up getting arrested and handcuffed for an open container and then possession of marijuana. The officer got his cell phone and scrolled through it asking about drug transactions. Kansas statute since 1970 closely followed Chimel. Even a one word amendment of the statute didn’t align Kansas with Belton. Search incident of the cell phone was unreasonable. And, of course, Riley was decided in the interim while the case was working through the courts. There also was no voluntary consent to search the phone. State v. James, 2015 Kan. LEXIS 239 (May 8, 2015), rev’g 48 Kan. App. 2d 310, 288 P.3d 504 (2012) (cited in Treatise at § 22.13 n.2).

Nearly 5½ years to decide a case? Justice delayed and all that? The Court of Appeals decision was November 2012. The Supreme Court 2½ years later.