{"id":9693,"date":"2014-01-12T06:57:39","date_gmt":"2013-10-31T06:11:38","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-10-31T06:11:38","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9693","title":{"rendered":"WA: Inventory after DUI arrest of evidence of ID theft not true inventory and suppressed"},"content":{"rendered":"

Defendant was arrested for DUI from a pedestrian accident. A search of his car produced receipts used in an identity theft prosecution. Seizure of the receipts was not lawful either as inventory or through the independent source doctrine, which required pure speculation to be applied. State v. Green<\/a>, 177 Wn. App. 332, 312 P.3d 669 (2013), prior appeal State v. Green, 162 Wn. App. 1069, 2011 Wash. App. LEXIS 1887 (2011):<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\u00b618 In this case, [Off.] Bacon did not recognize the receipts as either items subject to inventory or as evidence of a crime. While he properly looked inside the bag to determine whether it contained anything of value, Bacon testified that he did not consider the receipts to be relevant to his inventory search and there is no evidence that he did, in fact, inventory them. Bacon also candidly admitted that his seizure of the receipts was for investigatory purposes and that he \u201creally didn’t know at that point\u201d whether the receipts were evidence of any criminal activity. Verbatim Report of Proceedings (VRP) (1\/6\/2012) at 40-41. Thus, the record supports the trial court’s determination that the seizure of the receipts exceeded the lawful scope of the inventory search and became an investigatory search, unsupported by any exception to the warrant requirement. We affirm the trial court’s ruling that the receipts were not admissible under the inventory search exception.<\/p>\n

Independent Source Doctrine<\/center><\/p>\n

. . .<\/p>\n

\u00b621 We hold that the receipts are not admissible under the independent source doctrine. Neither the receipts nor knowledge of them were in fact found through an independent source. The receipts were not found while executing the first search warrant; the State only contends they would have been had they not been seized during the initial search. But the State’s argument requires this court to engage in the inevitable discovery doctrine’s \u201cspeculative analysis of whether the police would have ultimately obtained the same evidence by other lawful means. \u2026\u201d Smith, 165 Wn. App. at 310.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\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-9693","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9693","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=9693"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9693\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9693"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9693"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9693"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}