Category Archives: Inventory

S.D.N.Y.: Stop on an NYPD I-card showing PC was reasonable

NYPD uses “I-cards” (investigation cards) which can show facts supporting probable cause. This investigation was “closed,” but the I-card still was around, and officers used it to stop and question defendant. He refused to identify himself and he ended up … Continue reading →

Posted in Collective knowledge, Consent, Inevitable discovery, Inventory, Probable cause, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Stop on an NYPD I-card showing PC was reasonable

WI: During a traffic stop, officers can run the criminal history of passengers

During a traffic stop, officers can run the criminal history of passengers. State v. Pantle, 2026 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1138 (Oct. 14, 2026). Defendant’s conditional release search one week before the end of his term was based on reasonable suspicion … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Inventory, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on WI: During a traffic stop, officers can run the criminal history of passengers

GA: No case says SW required to ask for cell phone password

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not arguing that a warrant was required for a request for a cell phone password. No case anywhere says that’s required. Reynolds v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 303 (Sep. 22, 2026). The inventory search of … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Excessive force, Inventory, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on GA: No case says SW required to ask for cell phone password

N.D.Ohio: Car in driveway was on curtilage and plain view prohibited

Defendant backed into his driveway and that was curtilage. The police had neither a warrant nor exigent circumstances to come and look at his car to justify a plain view of an open container than led to finding a gun. … Continue reading →

Posted in Curtilage, Inevitable discovery, Inventory, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Car in driveway was on curtilage and plain view prohibited

N.D.Ohio: Not detailed enough inventory is not unreasonable

Too detailed an inventory not unreasonable. “Lynch offers no argument to suggest that his vehicle was not properly subject to the tow policy and its accompanying inventory search. Instead, Lynch appears to take issue with the manner in which Officer … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Qualified immunity, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Not detailed enough inventory is not unreasonable

W.D.Mo.: Not exactly following the inventory policy doesn’t make it unreasonable under 4A

Not exactly following the inventory policy doesn’t make it unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Maldonadochavarria, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180956 (W.D. Mo. July 13, 2026). “Here, King was placed in handcuffs and moved from the Rite Shop … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.Mo.: Not exactly following the inventory policy doesn’t make it unreasonable under 4A

IN: Officers leaving car door open to facilitate drug dog entry into car violated 4A

During a traffic stop, officers left defendant’s car door open apparently so the drug dog would go in, and it did. This entry violated the Fourth Amendment. Boyd v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 263 (Aug. 5, 2026). The inventory … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Dog sniff, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IN: Officers leaving car door open to facilitate drug dog entry into car violated 4A

CA7: It wasn’t a 4A violation to place a pole camera to look over def’s fence he built knowing he was under surveillance

Defendant knew he was under surveillance by police, so he installed a wooden privacy fence around his business property. So, police put a pole camera so they could look over the fence. The pole camera didn’t need a warrant. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Pole cameras, Probable cause, Search incident | Comments Off on CA7: It wasn’t a 4A violation to place a pole camera to look over def’s fence he built knowing he was under surveillance

D.Mass.: Inventory valid despite there being no impoundment policy

Despite the local police having no formal impoundment policy, defendant’s vehicle was impounded with their permission and inventoried by the FBI. The impoundment was still reasonable. United States v. Richards, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126028 (D. Mass. June 8, 2026). … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Strip search | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Inventory valid despite there being no impoundment policy

IL: A backpack is not as personal a repository of stuff as a purse or wallet; officers ordered it left in vehicle for safety reasons and it was inventoried

Defendant’s backpack is not as much a personal repository as a wallet or purse. When officers ordered the occupants out of the car, the backpack was at defendant’s feet, and he was ordered to leave it behind. The inventory was … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Inventory, Reasonableness | Comments Off on IL: A backpack is not as personal a repository of stuff as a purse or wallet; officers ordered it left in vehicle for safety reasons and it was inventoried

DC: Def seized when blocked on sidewalk not just when taken down

Defendant was seized when he was blocked by officers when he was walking, not just when he was taken down to the sidewalk. Greer v. United States, 2026 D.C. App. LEXIS 168 (May 14, 2026). Defendant was stopped because his … Continue reading →

Posted in Custody, Inventory, Seizure | Comments Off on DC: Def seized when blocked on sidewalk not just when taken down

S.D.Fla.: Inventory that omitted “miscellaneous personal items” was not unreasonable

A “clumsy” inventory that omitted “miscellaneous personal items” was not an unreasonable inventory. No level of specificity is required. United States v. Samuels, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96304 (S.D. Fla. May 1, 2026). The CSAM search warrant here for ten … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Inventory, Overbreadth | Comments Off on S.D.Fla.: Inventory that omitted “miscellaneous personal items” was not unreasonable

CA4: Dist.Ct. erred in applying search incident to arrest to suppress bag when inventory was inevitable

The District Court erred in applying search incident to defendant’s bag where there was a valid alternative ground of inevitable discovery through inventory when he would be processed into jail. United States v. Allen, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12443 (4th … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Pole cameras, Search incident, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on CA4: Dist.Ct. erred in applying search incident to arrest to suppress bag when inventory was inevitable

D.D.C.: It took the govt years to search def’s computers, and the court has to balance that huge delay with the truth-seeking function in resolving it

In a fraud case, the government took years to search the computers. A second warrant was obtained for some. The government doesn’t get to undo the delay by a new warrant, but the deterrence rationale of the exclusionary rule applies. … Continue reading →

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Franks doctrine, Inventory, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.D.C.: It took the govt years to search def’s computers, and the court has to balance that huge delay with the truth-seeking function in resolving it

CO: Incorporated and attached affidavit to SW narrowed its scope

The warrant included the application for it as defining its scope and it was attached. That limited the time and subject matter of the search. People v. Stauch, 2026 COA 22 (Apr. 2, 2026). The inventory of defendant’s car was … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Independent source, Inventory, Particularity, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CO: Incorporated and attached affidavit to SW narrowed its scope

NY Tompkins Co.: SW used for inventory of safe in a vehicle

An ALPR told officers that the owner had a suspended DL, and that justified the stop. The passenger had an arrest warrant on him. The vehicle was impounded. Behind an unsecured panel, a digital safe was found, and it was … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NY Tompkins Co.: SW used for inventory of safe in a vehicle

D.Minn.: Def arrested away from his motorcycle couldn’t have his attached backpack inventoried

Defendant was on the patio of a bar drinking a beer, and his motorcycle was 50-100′ away with his backpack on it. He was arrested, and he’d arranged for others to take his motorcycle. The backpack was seized and searched. … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Def arrested away from his motorcycle couldn’t have his attached backpack inventoried

CA10: RS didn’t dissipate during wait for drug dog

Reasonable suspicion here once developed didn’t dissipate before the 20-30 minute wait for the drug dog. United States v. Labs, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 5789 (10th Cir. Feb. 27, 2026). By statute, “[t]he evidence admissible for meeting the State’s burden … Continue reading →

Posted in Dog sniff, Forfeiture, Inventory, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: RS didn’t dissipate during wait for drug dog

IN: Inventory here was valid despite fact car was first impounded but then not towed after all

The inventory search of this car in anticipation of impoundment was overall reasonable, despite the fact that the car ultimately was not impounded. It might prove pretext, but it didn’t here. [This is fact heavy, and interesting reading.] Stokes v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Pretext | Comments Off on IN: Inventory here was valid despite fact car was first impounded but then not towed after all

OH4: Inventory found pretextual

The inventory here was found pretextual by the way the officer conducted it; e.g., not using gloves until something was found [which says nothing to me]. State v. Clark, 2026-Ohio-447, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 510 (4th Dist. Feb. 5, 2026). … Continue reading →

Posted in Administrative search, Franks doctrine, Inventory, Pretext, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on OH4: Inventory found pretextual