ICE inventory policy satisfies Wells

ICE agents conducted an inventory of defendant’s vehicle under standardized procedures under Florida v. Wells. Here, a gun was found with an illegal alien, as well as photographs of him holding the gun. United States v. Boffil-Rivera, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84632 (S.D. Fla. August 12, 2008):

The government need not present evidence of an agency’s written procedures for an inventory search to be valid; an officer’s testimony regarding his reliance on standardized procedures is sufficient as is his “unrebutted testimony that he acted in accordance with standard inventory procedures.” United States v. Lage, 183 F.3d 374, 380 (5th Cir. 1999); United States v. Lowe, 9 F.3d 43, 45-46 (8th Cir. 1993) (rejecting defendant’s argument that the government was required to submit a written version of the procedures governing inventory searches); Laing, 708 F.2d at 1570 (uncontroverted testimony of DEA agent as to his inspection of the contents of the defendant’s car “sufficiently established the routine nature of the procedure, thereby eliminating the possibility that the inventory check was conducted as a subterfuge for an investigatory search.”).

We find in this case that the government has met its burden of showing that ICE has a routine, standardized procedure governing inventory searches. The agents credibly testified that ICE mandates an inventory of every vehicle and vessel that comes into its custody. The agents articulated the rationale behind that policy: to safeguard the owner’s property and to protect ICE from liability claims. They discussed the necessity of completing ICE’s standardized inventory form and of documenting, in writing and through photographs, everything found inside the vehicle at the time an inventory occurred. They also mentioned processing items of evidentiary value through use of evidence bags that were turned over to a case agent at the conclusion of the inventory.

Civil case for unlawful search and seizure after the claims had been denied in plaintiff’s criminal case and affirmed on appeal cannot form the basis of a civil case. Also, the statute of limitations ran. Groves v. Battani, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84813 (N.D. Ind. October 20, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.