What is the test for reasonable search of a cigarette pack?

The officers' subjective intentions are beside the point. "An action is 'reasonable' under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, 'as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action.' [Citation.] The officer's subjective motivation is irrelevant. [Citations.]" (Brigham City v. Stuart (2006) 547 U.S. 398, 404-405 [regardless of their subjective motives, police officers were justified in entering a home without a warrant under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement].)

The legality of the search of the cigarette pack was not at issue at trial. The issue at trial was whether defendant possessed methamphetamine, not whether there was a Fourth Amendment violation or whether there was an applicable exception to the exclusionary rule. For example, the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule provides that if "the evidence in question would inevitably have been discovered without reference to the police error or misconduct, there is no nexus sufficient to provide a taint and the evidence is admissible." (Nix v. Williams (1984) 467 U.S. 431, 448.)