In People v. Benz (1984) 156 Cal. App. 3d 483, the court addressed the question: "What can be done with an individual who is detained pursuant to section 40307, subdivision (b) while an investigation to verify his or her identity is being conducted?" In Benz, a police officer observed the defendant driving his vehicle erratically at 1:30 a.m. The officer pulled the vehicle over. The defendant failed a roadside sobriety test and was placed under arrest for driving under the influence. The defendant had no driver's license or other identification and gave the officer a false name and address. The officer consequently arrested him for driving without a license ( 12951, subd. (a)). A breath test done at the jail was negative. The arresting officer attempted to verify defendant's license so that he could release him with a citation for driving without a license. Defendant once again gave the officer a false name and address. The police officer booked the defendant for giving false information to an officer ( 31) and driving without a license ( 12951, subd. (a)). During the booking process, defendant was asked to hand over his personal property. As defendant took off his boot, a cache of drugs spilled out. ( Id. at pp. 485-486.) Defendant moved to suppress the drug evidence. The trial court granted the motion. The appellate court reversed. The court found that section 40307, subdivision (b) applied and that the police had cause to detain the defendant for up to two hours. ( Id. at p. 487.) The court observed: "The California Supreme Court has consistently held that the police have the right to conduct a full-body inventory search of any person who is being booked into a jail facility. The justification for such a search falls into two broad categories--inventory and jail safety. . . . The Supreme Court has stated that 'the rationale behind these security measures is obvious: in a jail setting, a substantial number of persons are involuntarily confined for varied periods throughout a vast facility where constant supervision is not feasible.' It is clear that the same justifications and rationale that give the police the right to search a person prior to booking should give them that right prior to detention. Although the police could not have detained defendant for more than two hours under section 40307 . . .,they were still under an obligation to inventory and safeguard his property and to protect the jail from the introduction of any weapons or contraband." ( Benz, supra, 156 Cal. App. 3d at pp. 487-488.) The court held that the same justification for a jailhouse search prior to booking applied to a jailhouse search prior to detention pursuant to section 40307 and concluded that the evidence should not have been suppressed. ( Id. at p. 489.) The court did not discuss the amendment of section 40307. However, the court stated: "Although defendant is correct in claiming that he could not properly have been booked and searched without the opportunity to post bail, he could properly be detained and searched." (Ibid.)