"Generally speaking, in the absence of a statute, an officer has no right to take any property from the person of the prisoner except such as may afford evidence of the crime charged, or means of identifying the criminal, or may be helpful in making an escape."

Courts also observed that evidence found on the body of a person incident to arrest would often constitute a “means of identifying the criminal.”

"The officer making an arrest and search of the person of the prisoner may take any dangerous weapons or anything else that he reasonably may deem necessary to his own or the public safety, and to take into his possession the instruments of the crime and such other articles as may be of use as evidence at the trial.Ⓡ The right to take property from the person of a …

—court: "We find no statute of this State giving the arresting officer authority to search a prisoner, but no statute is necessary. The power exists from the nature and objects of the public duty the officer is required to perform. Such authority is directly given to a committing magistrate by statute (section 4308), but unless the arresting officer has the authority immediately, on …

Nevertheless, Chimel's narrower focus on concealment or destruction of evidence also has historical support.

—stating an officer "has the undoubted right to make the search, and, considering the nature of the accusation... take into his possession any articles he may suppose will aid in securing the conviction of the prisoner, or will prevent escape

The court noted that the origins of that rule "deriv [e] from the interest which the State has in a person guilty (or reasonably believed to be guilty) of a crime being brought to justice, and in a prosecution, once commenced, being determined in due course of law."

In the 19th century, the subject came up for discussion more often, but court decisions and treatises alike confirmed the searches' broad acceptance

The citations in the nine opinions add but three additional cases to the line of authority cited in Bishop

On appeal by plaintiff from a judgment in his favor, the amount in dispute is the difference between the amount claimed and that recovered.