Cleveland v. State, 81-1293
| Decision Date | 17 March 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-1293,81-1293 |
| Citation | 410 So.2d 1378 |
| Parties | Joshua CLEVELAND, a/k/a Cleveland Joshua, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Charles D. Peters, Asst. Public Defender, and Johnny McCray, Jr., Legal Intern, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joy B. Shearer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Joshua Cleveland's probation was revoked because a shotgun was discovered in the trunk of his car as a result of an inventory search. The trial court denied Joshua's motion to suppress the physical evidence discovered during the inventory search and this appeal ensued.
Joshua was stopped by police for driving his car without a current inspection sticker or license plate; neither did he have a driver's license or registration certificate. Ownership of the vehicle was not confirmed through a VIN number inquiry. A routine records check reflected two outstanding warrants, so Joshua was arrested. Joshua's uncle appeared at the scene and both Joshua and his uncle requested that the uncle be allowed to drive the car home. The police refused; the car was impounded and during an inventory search the shotgun was found.
In order for the police to impound an automobile, there must be an actual need for impoundment. Reasonable and necessary impoundments include:
(1) an unattended car illegally parked or otherwise illegally obstructing traffic, an illustration of which is the factual situation in the Opperman case (South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364, 96 S.Ct. 3092, 49 L.Ed.2d 1000 (1976) ); (2) an unattended car at the scene of an accident where the driver is physically or mentally incapable of deciding what steps to take to deal with his vehicle such as might occur when the driver is seriously injured, mentally incapacitated, or severely intoxicated; (3) an abandoned vehicle; (4) a mechanically defective vehicle which, if driven, could menace others on the public highway; (5) a vehicle identified as stolen. There may be other circumstances; this list is not all-inclusive. Miller v. State, 403 So.2d 1307, 1313 (Fla.1981).
The State has the burden of proof to show that the impoundment was lawful, reasonable, and necessary under the circumstances of the particular case. Miller, supra. Absent a proper impoundment the propriety of the inventory search need not be reached.
In Miller, supra, the Supreme...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Kuster
...reasonable cause for the impoundment." Singleton, 511 P.2d at 399. Boster, 533 P.2d at 299 ("reasonable grounds"); Cleveland v. State, 410 So.2d 1378, 1379 (Fla.App.1982) ("there must be an actual need for impoundment"); Granville v. State, 348 So.2d 641, 642 (Fla.App.1977) ("there must be ......
-
Commonwealth v. Hughes
...was never any suggestion that the defendant or Martin were so intoxicated as to render them incapable of operating the car. In Cleveland v. State, 410 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 4DCA defendant was stopped for minor traffic violations. Defendant's uncle was a passenger in the car and he offered to dri......
- Fredrick v. Dolgencorp, LLC
- Davis v. State, s. 81-643