D.P.R.: Lack of paperwork on inventory at hearing is troubling, but the inventory was still valid

Not leaving defendant’s car in the “largest shopping mall in the Caribbean” justified removal and inventory of the car. The lack of paperwork at the hearing was troubling, but not unconstitutional. United States v. Villa-Guillen, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123537 (D. P.R. July 25, 2019):

Villa’s argument that the government failed to introduce a form or other official notes from inventory search procedure is more compelling. Dkt. 69 at 5. Villa contends that Salgado ought to have employed the PPR-128 form or something similar because Salgado is a PRPD officer and the PPR-128 lays out the specific parts of a vehicle to be examined in an inventory search. See Dkt. 69-1 (PPR-128); Dkt. 71 (certified translation of PPR-128). In Cruz-Rivera, the PRPD officers searched in accordance with the PPR-128. See, e.g., Cruz-Rivera, 465 F. Supp. 2d at 108-10. On the other hand, those officers were not members of the DEA Task Force, which conceivably might use different forms. The government did not address the concern that proper procedure might not have been followed or whether PRPD or DEA procedure was used. The absence of any form or notes detailing the search is troubling and calls into question the procedural aspect of the search. It is good practice for law enforcement to record any search activity in notes or using official forms to demonstrate adherence to procedure.