NY: Impoundment for minor traffic infraction with no arrest did not permit inventory

Seizure of a car based on an impoundment ordinance for a minor safety infraction that did not even permit a physical arrest of the driver (taillight out; noise) was unconstitutional because there was no crime. Impoundment was followed by an inventory producing a gun. People v. Iverson, 22 Misc. 3d 470, 870 N.Y.S.2d 698 (Rochester NY City Ct. 2008):

Nor was impoundment of defendant’s vehicle necessary to enhance public safety or to permit the unimpeded flow of traffic. After being ticketing for the two traffic infractions, defendant was not taken into physical custody. He possessed and showed the police officer his valid driver’s license and proof of registration. Defendant’s car was neither disabled nor impeding vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Defendant was physically capable of driving the car away. See United States v. Duguay, 93 F.3d at 353.

In sum, when the police officer stopped defendant for two traffic infractions, he had no basis to believe that either defendant or the vehicle was involved in criminal activity, and he had no constitutionally legitimate community caretaking reason to impound defendant’s car. The impoundment of defendant’s car was therefore unconstitutional. See United States v. Caseres, 533 F.3d at 1074-75 (absent a constitutionally legitimate community caretaking purpose, impoundment of defendant’s car violated the Fourth Amendment); United States v. Duguay, 93 F.3d at 353; People v. Miles, 3 Misc 3d at 571.

. . .

As in Knowles, the unconstitutional impoundment and concomitant search of defendant’s car in this case cannot be rendered constitutional by the existence of statutory authority. Accordingly, to the extent that Rochester City Code §75-12 provided the sole authority for the police to impound defendant’s car, it is unconstitutional as applied to defendant. See People v. Williams, 145 Cal. App. 4th 756, 762-63 (2 Dist. 2006)(state law authorizing a vehicle’s impoundment whenever the driver is taken into custody cannot validate an impoundment that does not serve a constitutionally valid community caretaking function); People v. McFarland (Sup. Ct., Monroe County, Aug. 26, 2003, Fisher, J)(police search of defendant’s car, authorized by Rochester City Code §75-12, was unconstitutional where defendant was not taken into physical custody after being stopped for a violation of Rochester’s excessive vehicle sound ordinance).

Nervousness plus appearing under the influence of drugs is reasonable suspicion. Robinson v. State, 295 Ga. App. 136, 670 S.E.2d 520 (2008).*

Extending detention because the passenger’s ID did not come back and she had all the signs of being strung out on meth. Matthews v. State, 294 Ga. App. 836, 670 S.E.2d 520 (2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.