Appellant challenged the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, which was seized after he was detained for urinating in a public place. He contended that the detention and search incident to arrest were unlawful because urinating in public is not a crime. The appellate court disagreed, and affirmed the denial of the suppression motion. The detention and search were proper because the officer had a reasonable suspicion appellant was committing a “public nuisance” within the meaning of Penal Code section 370, by urinating in public in view of a busy street.