How has the Attorney General argued that a different warrant would have been issued from any judge in the world?

I concur with the result but withhold judgment at this time on the import of the quoted language of People v. McDowell (1988) 46 Cal.3d 551, 250 Cal.Rptr. 530, 763 P.2d 1269. I believe that analysis is unnecessary to the opinion, in that the Attorney General's inevitable discovery argument was not based on the theory a different warrant would have issued from any "judge in the world." Rather, he argued "the officers could have searched the bag under the auspices of the warrant that arrived ten minutes later," rendering it "independently admissible under the doctrine of inevitable discovery." Therefore his argument was not that a [216 Cal.App.3d 595] warrant would have issued, it was that one did issue and that the issued warrant inferentially encompassed the bag.