D.D.C.: A private tow didn’t violate US Capitol Police inventory policy or 4A

The US Capitol Police inventory policy was followed here, and the motion to suppress is denied. The fact a private company towed the vehicle is of no moment to the policy or the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Johnson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4591 (D.D.C. Jan. 9, 2026).

“The temporal proximity and intervening-circumstances factors weigh heavily in Talton’s favor. As the record demonstrates, Fatching arrived on scene the morning of May 19, 2025, conducted the search shortly thereafter, seized the firearm, arrested Talton, and transported him to the Genesee County Jail. Sergeant Duhart interviewed Talton the next morning after he confirmed he was no longer under the influence of alcohol. A one-day delay between his unlawful arrest and confession, where he remained in custody the entire time and did not talk to a lawyer, favors suppression. … “Moreover, the record does not show ‘any meaningful intervening event’ between the illegal [search] and [Defendant’s] confession.’ Kaupp, 538 U.S. at 633 (quoting Taylor v. Alabama, 457 U.S. 687, 691 (1982)).” Therefore, considering the brief time between the illegal search and the confession and because ‘there was no intervening event of significance whatsoever,’ it is clear that Talton’s confession arose as a result of the illegal search and his subsequent arrest. Brown, 422 U.S. at 604. Talton’s confession will be suppressed.” United States v. Talton, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4563 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 9, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Inventory. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.