Be Mindful of the “Community Caretaking” Guidelines When Conducting Vehicle Inventory Searches

From the Classroom 
By Ray Hill 
Professor Emeritus, Santa Rosa Junior College 

Vehicle Inventory Searches and the “Community Caretaking” Function 

Background 

With the proliferation of “side shows” in Sonoma County, I had an “OG” officer tell me: “If I have reason to tow the car, I’m going to search it.” Certainly, you should follow your standardized department policies in a decision to impound and complete inventory paperwork prior to a tow (South Dakota v. Opperman (1976) 428 U.S. 364; Colorado v. Bertine (1987) 479 U.S. 367). Your agency policy is based upon: 1) Protecting you and your agency from false allegations of theft or damage to the vehicle or property within; 2) Protecting the vehicle itself and its contents from theft or vandalism given the area in which it is parked; 3) Protecting and securing any high-value property inside the car for safekeeping and return; and 4) Securing dangerous devices or hazardous materials for public safety reasons, i.e., explosives, flammables, and chemicals.  

Despite the authority of a California statute, or city/county ordinances, for towing (i.e., driving with a revoked license, registration fees due, custodial arrest), Fourth Amendment case law specifies that an inventory search will not result in the admissibility of any evidence “fortuitously” found in the car unless there is a “caretaking purpose” for the impound.  

Examples 

• “The fact that an inventory search is authorized by statute is not determinative of the search’s constitutionality.” (Peo. v. Torres (2010) 188 Cal. App. 4th 775) 
• “Indeed, search jurisprudence presumes some objectively reasonable basis for supporting the impound.” (Peo. v. Williams (2006) 145 Cal. App. 5th 1006) 
• “To be lawful, the impound must both be authorized by statute and in compliance with the “community caretaking doctrine.” (Peo. v. Lee (2019) 40 Cal. App. 5th 883) 

Further Case Rulings 

A Buena Park Police officer arrested the defendant for driving under the influence of drugs. Defendant’s vehicle was parked in a drug store lot where there had been reported ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.