riley's lawyer moved to suppress all the evidence the officers had obtained during the search of his cell phone on the grounds that the search violated his fourth amendment rights. the trial court rejected this argument and held that the search was legitimate under the sita doctrine. riley was convicted. on appeal, the court affirmed the judgment based on the recent california supreme court decision "people v. diaz". in "diaz", the court held that the fourth amendment "search-incident-to-arrest" doctrine permits the police to conduct a full exploratory search of a cell phone (even if it is conducted later and at a different location) whenever the phone is found near the suspect at the time of arrest.