NY3: Inventory didn’t comply with dept. policy and there was no full inventory

Defendant’s traffic stop was valid, but the state failed to show the impoundment complied with departmental policies. There was no evidence the vehicle was unsecured or unsafe if left at the scene. The inventory search failed to follow departmental procedures requiring a complete inventory list and proper documentation. There were also indications the inventory search was merely a pretext to search for evidence, and that was unconstitutional. People v. Gray, 2025 NY Slip Op 00249, 2025 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 261 (3d Dept. Jan. 16, 2025).

“Faced with uncontroverted evidence of two traffic violations at the evidentiary hearing, Defendant conceded the dark window tint and argued only that the license plate violation could not have been observed until the SUV passed by Officer Bensema. … Regardless of the established traffic violations, according to Defendant, because Officer Bensema had received prior information from Sgt. Stripling about possible narcotics in the SUV, the stop was ‘textbook’ pretext, and the evidence must be suppressed. Id. The Court disagrees.” United States v. Bolding, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8006 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 15, 2025).*

As a passenger, defendant shows no standing to challenge the search of the car. United States v. Nuñez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8116 (D.P.R. Jan. 14, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.