Virden, 488 F.3d 1317, 1322 (11th Cir.2007) (“Under the inevitable discovery exception, if the prosecution can establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the information would have ultimately been recovered by lawful means, the evidence will be admissible.”). Therefore, we affirm the denial of the second motion to suppress on this alternative basis. “Inventory searches of an arrestee’s personal property are á well-defined exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.” United States v. Farley, 607 F.3d 1294, 1333 (11th Cir.2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). Wh hallenge to the validity of the custodial seizure and subsequent inventory search. Blanchard’s brief does not address the issue at all. See United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273, 1283 n. 8 (11th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). And, while Cooper asserts in her issue
holding that issues not raised in an appellants initial brief are deemed abandoned holding that issues raised but not supported by argument are deemed abandoned holding that issues not argued in initial brief are deemed waived holding that claims not raised in an appellants initial brief to our court are waived holding that petitioner abandoned issues and claims not sufficiently raised in his brief