428 U.S. 364 (1976)
State appealed the judgment that held that local police violated U.S. Constitutional Amendment IV when they conducted a routine inventory search of an automobile lawfully impounded by police, contending that the search and seizure was not unreasonable.
- On appeal, the judgment was reversed and remanded on the basis that the police were indisputably engaged in a caretaking search and such was not unreasonable.
- The court reasoned that the owner, having left his car illegally parked for an extended period and thus subject to impoundment, was not present to make other arrangements for the safekeeping of his belongings.
- Further, the inventory itself was prompted by the presence in plain view of a number of valuables inside the car.
- The court held that there was no suggestion whatever that the standard procedure was a pretext concealing an investigatory police motive.
- The court concluded that in following standard police procedures the conduct of the police was not unreasonable underU.S. Constitutional Amendment IV.
The judgment that held that local police violated the constitution when they conducted a routine inventory search of an automobile lawfully impounded by police for violations of municipal parking ordinances was reversed because the conduct of the police was not unreasonable. The court reasoned that the police were indisputably engaged in a caretaking search of a lawfully impounded automobile.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure: Examples & Explanations, Sixth Edition
Emanuel Law Outline: Criminal Procedure