This is a case that deals with what the lawful procedure is for inventorying a car after someone has been arrested. It is particularly relevant because of the Supreme Courts decision in Arizona v. Gant.
In this case, Officer Howard Brown of the Lamesa Police Department stopped Stauder for failing to wear a seatbelt. During the traffic stop, Officer Brown observed that the registration sticker on Stauder’s pickup had been altered and was fictitious. Officer Brown arrested Stauder for that crime and had his pickup impounded. In preparation for the impoundment and towing of the pickup, Officer Brown and other officers conducted what they called an inventory search of the car. During the search, officers found a handgun and narcotics in an unlocked container in the bed of Stauder’s pickup. The police department had a written policy requiring that an inventory form be filled out, the officers failed to prepare an inventory of the list of items located in Stauder’s pickup. Lamesa Chief of Police Richard Garcia testified that, by failing to complete the inventory sheet, his officers failed to follow departmental policy when they inventoried Stauder’s pickup. The trial court found that the incriminating items should be suppressed because they were discovered during a warrantless search that lacked validity as an inventory based on the officers failute to follow the written policy and fill out an inventory form listing the contents of the pickup.
The alleged purpose of an inventory search is to protect the police from claims of lost property, and to protect the police from dangerous contents. For an inventory search to be valid, the inventory search must not deviate from police department policy. The state has to show that there was an inventory policy in place and that the policy was followed by the police.
David Breston is a Texas drug crimes defense attorney. If you need a Texas drug crime defense lawyer, call David Breston at 713 224 4040.
