Defendants driver Holland and Kelley, his passenger, were charged with drug possession with the intent to sell. Officers had arrested the driver on a misdemeanor, for changing lanes without signaling, after the officers had been advised by High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area undercover officers to prevent the defendants from potentially robbing a confidential informant of narcotics. Upon arrest, officers had searched the center console of the vehicle, finding evidence that suggested their intent to sell drugs. The officers admitted to having no factual basis for believing that there was evidence of either defendant's drug possession within the vehicle at the time of arrest. Holland and Kelley argued that the search of the vehicle that ensued after the driver's arrest was unlawful and that evidence obtained through the arrest should be found inadmissible. The government argued that the arrest and search was lawful pursuant to the "good-faith exception" and the "inevitability exception." Whom do you think the court found in favor of? Why?