Officer Can Search Your Car Just Because He Wants to Make Sure its Safe

Once again we have another piece of poorly decided judicial activism out of the fourth district court of appeal. Last month, in People v. Shafrir, the court of appeal used the fourth amendment to provide a cloak for an illegal and trumped up vehicle inventory search after a poor sap was arrested for driving under the influence and a couple of CHP officers decided to impound his car for "safe keeping." How nice of them, huh?

In this case, appellant (the poor sap) was arrested for DUI, subsequently the two CHP officers who arrested him, decided to remove and store his luxury benz. The officers stated that the decision was initially based on the fact that appellant's car was a brand new Mercedes parked in a bad area. The officers performed an "inventory" search of the vehicle and during the search located and removed a marijuana and large amount of cash.

The Officers then changed their authority for impounding the car from the “safekeeping” provision of Vehicle Code section 22651, subdivision (h) to the “seizure of evidence” provision of Vehicle Code section 22655.5. The appellate court, using questionable reasoning, decided to uphold the actions of the officers.

The court found, that in applying the Fourth Amendment standard of reasonableness, the officers actions were reasonable given the fact that they had a valid reason, initially, for not leaving the Mercedes in an area that they characterized as a "high crime" area. Sounds like the officers can now feel free to provide "safe keeping" for any car they want to impound and then conveniently do an inventory search.

Once again, another bite taken out of the Fourth Amendment.