Kilburn v. State (1st District Court of Appeals February 22nd 2011)

On September 26, 2009, a Santa Rosa County deputy sheriff observed Kilburn's pick-up truck weaving and crossing the centerline of the road several times over the course of approximately two and one-half miles. The deputy suspected that the truck's driver was under the influence, so he activated his lights to initiate a traffic stop. The truck did not immediately stop and, when it did, it almost hit a garbage can sitting near the road. Kilburn was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), and the state charged the offense as a felony based upon Kilburn's three prior DUI convictions.

Kilburn's truck had to be towed after his arrest because it was located in an unsafe location on the side of a busy road, and as part of the impoundment process, the deputy conducted an “inventory search” of the truck. The deputy testified that Sheriff's Office policy required an inventory search to be done whenever a vehicle is towed, but that there were no standardized criteria or procedures for conducting such a search. During the search, the deputy found marijuana(less than 20 grams) and pills that turned out to be alprazolam and hydrocodone.  Kilburn was charged with possessionof these drugs in addition to the felony DUI charge.

A warrantless search is per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment subject to a few well-defined exceptions. The state has the burden to prove that an exception to the warrant requirement applies. Here, the state relied on the exception that allows law enforcement to conduct an inventory search of an impounded vehicle. In order for this exception to apply, the inventory search must be “conducted according to standardized criteria.”  The requirement for standardized criteria serves to limit police discretion in determining the scope of the search and ensures that the police will not abuse the exception and use the inventory search as a subterfuge for a criminal investigatory search.

The trial court did not make any findings regarding the existence of, or the deputy's compliance with, standardized criteria in conducting the inventory searchof Kilburn's truck. Although the deputy testified that it was standard Sheriff's Office policy to conduct an inventory search whenever a vehicle was towed, he also testified that there were no standardized criteria for performing such a search. Additionally, the state did not present any evidence that it was standard Sheriff's Office policy to open closed containers found during the search, such as the pill bottle in Kilburn's truck where the drugs were found. Accordingly, under these circumstances, the trial court erred in denying Kilburn's motion to suppress the drugs found in his truck.

Notes:  It used to be that following an arrest the police always performed an "inventory search."  And during this "inventory search, anything found was fair game and within the scope of the officer's search of the vehicle.  The Courts have more reciently been willing to restrain this type of search recognizing it as an intrusion that exceeds the need or justification offered by the State.