The Salem inventory policy requires inventory of closed containers that might have something valuable in them. In defendant’s backpack was a nylon case which the officer believed might contain a computer harddrive or a computer gaming device. The inventory was reasonable, and the fact there is some discretion in the seizing officer as what to inventory does not make an inventory policy unreasonable. State v. Cleland, 289 Ore. App. 379, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 1581 (Dec. 20, 2017) (decided under state constitution, but its language is applicable to Fourth Amendment).
The codefendant let the police in the house, and they made a plain view. The evidence supports the finding of consent and plain view. United States v. Bourne, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25718 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2017).*