E.D.Tenn.: Belief that there was a gun left in defendant’s car was a valid justification for its inventory

Belief that there was a gun left in defendant’s car was a valid justification for its inventory [remember Cady v. Dombrowski and the off-duty officer’s service revolver?]. United States v. Bah, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148943 (E.D. Tenn. August 8, 2013):

Officer Davidson testified repeatedly that his primary focus in conducting an inventory search was to look for weapons. Harvey’s strange actions in the car raised a reasonable suspicion that there were guns in the car, and Officer Davidson was concerned about leaving weapons in an impounded car which could be stolen, and used, by anyone.

Officer Davidson also called a K-9 officer to walk his drug dog around the car. Officer Davidson testified he requested that this be done because the vehicle was a rental car. If the car had drugs concealed within it, subsequent renters of the car could be caused a great deal of trouble. If the car had been owned by Bah, walking a drug dog around it would suggest that Officer Davidson was motivated to search for evidence of a crime. But this was a rental car. Officer Davidson’s explanation for requesting the drug dog walk-around makes sense, and is believed.

This was a valid inventory search to the necessary towing and impoundment of the vehicle, and it was in no way a pretense to search for evidence of contraband.