In Stapleton v. Superior Court (1968) 70 Cal.2d 97, a special agent for a credit card company accompanied policemen and two other private agents during the arrest of Stapleton, for whom an arrest warrant for credit card fraud was outstanding. Having assisted in the arrest, the agent, Bradford, joined the police in searching the house. On his own initiative, Bradford asked if anyone had searched Stapleton's car, which he remembered having seen some distance down the street. Someone responded negatively. Another credit card agent handed Bradford the keys and Bradford searched the car. The Supreme Court ordered the fruits of the search suppressed: "The search of petitioner's car was clearly part of a joint operation by police and the credit card agents aimed at arresting petitioner and obtaining evidence against him. This official participation in the planning and implementation of the overall operation is sufficient without more to taint with state action the subsequent acts of such credit card agents. . . . The agency did not end nor Bradford revert to private status when as part of that operation, although without specific instruction from the police, Bradford searched petitioner's car. (See People v. Fierro, supra , 236 Cal.App.2d 344, 347; compare People v. Moran (1958) 166 Cal.App.2d 410, 415.) Accordingly, even though police officers did not direct Bradford to search the car,. . . the evidence discovered by Bradford during that joint operation is inadmissible." (70 Cal.2d at pp. 100, 102.)