Where a defendant is lawfully arrested inside his home, is a warrantless search of the area beyond the defendant’s immediate control constitutional?

Buck v Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927), and Skinner v Oklahoma ex rel.Williamson 316 U.S. (1942).
BELOW is an example of how he wants his law briefs to look for class
BRIEF SAMPLE
Chimel v California
Facts: The police came to Defendant’s home with an arrest warrant for an alleged burglary. The police asked permission to “look around” the house. The defendant refused the request and the police proceeded to search the home anyways. The police also made the defendant’s wife remove various contents of various dresser drawers. The police seized coins and medals which were later used to convince the defendant of burglary.
Issue: Where a defendant is lawfully arrested inside his home, is a warrantless search of the area beyond the defendant’s immediate control constitutional?
Holding: Where there is probable cause to search and there is a clear danger that the items which are the subject of the search may be removed prior to police obtaining a search warrant, a warrantless search of the area beyond the arrestee’s immediate control is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
Legal rational: In a 7-2 decision, the Court held that the search of Chimel’s house was unreasonable under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment’s. The Court reasoned that “searches incident to arrest” are limited to the area within the immediate control of the suspect. While police could reasonably search and seize evidence on or around the arrestee’s person, they were prohibited from rummaging through the entire house without a search warrant. The Court emphasized the importance of warrants and probable cause as necessary bulwarks against government abuse.