{"id":1640,"date":"2008-01-04T09:56:56","date_gmt":"2007-12-29T10:46:49","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-12-29T10:46:49","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=1640","title":{"rendered":"Inventory invalid: mere recital of reasons for inventory says nothing about policy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Inventory here was not shown by the state to be permitted by standard police policy. Recital of reasons for an inventory shows nothing of policy. State v. Fann<\/a>, 2007 Ohio 6985, 2007 Ohio App. LEXIS 6115 (8th Dist. December 27, 2007):<\/p>\n

[*P18] As an administrative function unrelated to a criminal investigation, an inventory search does not implicate the policies underlying the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. Id.<\/em> at 109. “In order for an inventory search to be constitutionally valid, it must be ‘reasonable,’ that is, it must be conducted in good faith, not as a pretext for an investigative search, and in accordance with standardized police procedures or established routine.” State v. Wilcoxson <\/em>(July 25, 1997), Montgomery App. No. 15928, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 3566. See, also, State v. Sarrocco <\/em>(1997), 96 Ohio Misc.2d 1, 4, 707 N.E.2d 1219 (“Evidence of standardized criteria or established routine establishes that the claimed inventory search is not just a ruse for an otherwise illegal search.”); State v. Corrado<\/em> (Feb. 20, 1998), Lake App. No. 96-L-104, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 642 (“Without evidence of the policy as it relates to [containers found in a vehicle], an inventory search of such containers *** is constitutionally impermissible.”).<\/p>\n

[*P19] In analyzing the State’s argument, we note a distinction between “policy” and “reasons.” The portion of Mesa<\/em> relied on by the State sets forth the “reasons” why police departments conduct inventory searches. Thus, the testimony of the detectives basically recited the Mesa<\/em> reasons, but did not provide any insight into the Cleveland police department’s policy, practice or procedure when conducting an inventory search. For example, the testimony did not state that the Cleveland police department’s policy is to search areas where items are protruding from enclosed areas. To the contrary, Detective Spencer testified that he generally would not search an area covering a speaker, but his “curiosity” prompted him to do so in this case. Moreover, Detective O’Donnell testified that she did not know what the police department’s policy was in regard to such a search.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The affidavit for the anticipatory search warrant validly described the triggering event for execution of the warrant. (All that really doesn’t matter, however, because the court also finds probable cause to search the premise regardless of the triggering event.) State v. Blevins<\/a>, 2007 Ohio 6972, 2007 Ohio App. LEXIS 6109 (3d Dist. December 26, 2007). Comment: <\/em>The court discusses at length, for what it is worth, the “sure and irreversible course” for triggering events, which is at least worth the read.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1640","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1640","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1640"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1640\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1640"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1640"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1640"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}