Policy Text
TRAINING BULLETIN
Evaluation Coordinator: Traffic Section Commander
Automatic Revision Cycle: 3 Years
partment Training Bulletins shall be used to advise members of current police techniques and
procedures and shall constitute official policy.” Index Number: III-E.7
Alpha Index: Tows Incident to Arrest Effective Date:
4 Nov 09
“De
VEHICLE TOWS INCIDENT TO ARREST
In the case of People v. Williams, the defendant was arrested on an outstanding warrant and his
vehicle was impounded under authority 22651(h)(1) CVC. Prior to towing the vehicle (incident to
arrest) the officer conducted an inventory search of the vehicle and found a loaded handgun in a
bag in the backseat. Upon review by the appellate court, William’s conviction for the gun was overturned because the officer impounded his vehicle without regards to it being legally parked, among other vehicles legally parked upon the roadway. The court noted for the consideration of
impounding a vehicle incident to arrest, officers must articulate that the impoundment must serve
as a “community car etaking function.”
Community Caretaking Function is defined as “an officer’s duty to prevent a vehicle from creating
a hazard to other drivers or being a target for vandalism or theft."
The impounding officer must consider the following:
• Is the vehicle more or less likely than “any other vehicle on the roadway” to be a target of
vandalism or theft? or
• Is it parked in the roadway in a manner that would obstruct the normal flow of traffic?
Officers may consider their knowledge of the area where the stop was conducted to determine the
elements of a community care taking function. The vehicle itself may lead the officer to impound the vehicle. The following can be considered:
• Is the officer aware of more thefts of that vehi cle type in the area or burglaries of vehicles in
that area?
• Is it the type of vehicle that would lend itself to vandalism or theft?
• Is it a gang member’s vehicle in a rival gang member’s area?
Justifying the impoundment solely because of a “high crime area” would be insufficient.
If the impounding officer believes the impoundment is justified under these circumstances, he/she
shall
document the circumstances and justifica tion in the appropriat e Offense Report. The
documentation of any evidence discovered during the vehicle inventory will support the admissibility of the evidence into court. In th e event the arrest does not generate an Offense
Report, the officer shall
document the circumstances and ju stification on the Stored Vehicle
Report (TF-971).
2
Tows Incident to Arrest, Index Number III-E.7
Proper Application
Officer Jones stops a motorist for failing to stop at a stop sign. The motorist comes to a stop with
his car double parked, adjacent to cars parked at the curb. Officer Jones subsequently arrests the
driver for DUI. Officer Jones notes that there are no available park ing spaces in the area. Officer
Jones determines that because of the vehicle’s position, it is a h azard to traffic and impounds the
vehicle under authority 22651(h)(1) CVC.
Officer Peters stops a delivery truck on E 9
th St. at 33rd Ave. Officer Peters arrests the driver for a
felony warrant and there are no other occupants in the truck. The owner of the truck is in Modesto and can not respond to take possession of his truck. Officer Peters observes that there are several
other delivery trucks in the area and all have graffiti painted on them. Officer Peters observes that
the truck he stopped is new and unmarked. Because of the likelihood that the truck he stopped
would be vandalized, Officer Peters impounds the vehicle under authority 22651(h)(1) CVC.
Improper Application
Officer Smith stops a motorist for having a head lig ht out. The motorist st ops his car at the curb.
Officer Smith arrests the driver for possession of cocaine. There are no other occupants in the
vehicle and the car is parked legally. Because the dr iver is a “problem person” on Officer Smith’s
beat, he elects to impound the vehicle under authority 22651(h)(1) CVC to punish him.
Officer Brown stops a motorist for running a red light. The motorist stops his car in his assigned
parking space at the apartment building where he lives. Officer Brown arrests the driver for an
outstanding Domestic Violence warrant. Officer Brown thinks that there might be narcotics in the
vehicle but has no legal justification to search the vehicle. Officer Brown elects to impound the
vehicle under authority 22651(h)(1) CVC in order to conduct an inventory search.
3
4 Nov 09 ● Oakland Police Department
Related Laws and Decisions
CVC § 22651. Circumstances Permitting Removal
Any peace officer may remove a vehicle located within the territorial limits in which the officer
or employee may act, under any of the following circumstances:
(h)(1) When an officer arrests any person driving or in control of a vehicle for an alleged
offense and the officer is, by this code or other law, required or permitted to take, and does take,
the person into custody.
South Dakota v. Opperman (1976 )
As part of their "community caretaking func tions", police officers may constitutionally impound
vehicles that "jeopardize . . . public safety and the efficient movement of vehicular traffic."
Miranda v. City of Cornelius (2005)
Whether "impoundment is warranted under this community caretaking doctrine depends on the
location of the vehicle and the police officers' duty to prevent it