Whether the inventory search doctrine can be invoked on slight evidence when no written inventory search policy was produced and the police officer's testimony was vague, patchy, and only clear that he was entitled to search all property taken with the person when arrested

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The police violated the Fourth Amendment when they searched Wilborne’s backpack and recovered a firearm that formed the basis of the indictment filed against him. Nevertheless, the district court denied Wilborne’s motion to suppress the firearm, holding that the police would have inevitably discovered it during an inventory search either at the police station or the local jail when Wilborne was transported there. No written inventory search policy was produced, leaving the Government to rely on a police officer witness whose testimony was vague, patchy, and clear only in that he was certain he was entitled to search “[a]ll the property that is taken — taken with the person” when that person is arrested. The issue in this Petition is whether the inventory search doctrine can be invoked on such slight evidence. -1 II.