Read the following case:

Acting on an anonymous tip that a residence was being used to sell drugs, Tucson, Arizona police officers knocked on the front door of the residence. Rodney Gant opened the door, and the police asked to speak to the owner. Gant identified himself and stated that the owner was expected to return later. The police officers left the residence. Later, the police conducted a records search that revealed that there was an outstanding warrant for Gant's arrest for driving with a suspended license. When the police officers returned to the house that evening, Gant drove up in an automobile, parked in the driveway, got out of his car, and shut the door. One of the police officers called to Gant and he walked toward the officer. When Gant was about 1012 feet from the car, the officer arrested Gant, handcuffed him and locked him in the backseat of a patrol car. The police officers searched Gant's car and found a gun and a bag of cocaine. Gant was charged with possession of a narcotic drug for sale. At the time of trial, Gant filed a Motion to suppress the evidence from the car on the ground that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment. The Arizona trial court held that the search was permissible as a search incident to arrest. The Arizona Supreme Court held that the search of Gant's car was unreasonable and violated the Fourth Amendment and the evidence was inadmissible at trial. The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

ASA Justice of SCOTUS was the warrantless search justified as a search incident to an arrest? Issue your decision, Your Honor.