search the site using Google™

 


Inventory Search


On October 2, 1989, at approximately 1:45 a.m. a Deputy Bailey of the Orange County, Texas, Sheriff's Department stopped a vehicle on a public highway for failure to drive within a single lane.

The driver, Jimmy Autran, was accompanied by his adult son. Autran and his son stated they had been to Houston to film a professional football game for a Miami, Florida television station and tendered press passes issued by the Metro-Dade Police Department. The Deputy testified the press passes had expired. Autran also presented a Florida driver's license, displaying a Miami address, and an Illinois vehicle registration form. Autran stated he had purchased the vehicle within the previous five months; the registration indicated he had purchased the vehicle approximately eighteen months prior to the stop. With Autran's permission, Deputy Bailey looked inside the vehicle but found nothing suspicious.

Bailey then requested permission to look in the trunk. Autran stated, "no problem," and opened the trunk. Inside the trunk was a large ice chest, a cardboard box, a shopping bag, and two suitcases. Deputy Bailey attempted to open the ice chest but was interrupted when Autran attempted to close the trunk. Bailey arrested Autran for failure to "drive as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane," Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 6701d,  60(a). Autran's son was arrested for public intoxication, Tex. Penal Code Ann. 42.08.

Following the established policy of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, Bailey and other officers began to inventory the vehicle. Opening the ice chest, cardboard box, and shopping bag, the officers found large sums of cash. Due to the time and location, the inventory was discontinued and the vehicle towed to the Orange County Sheriff's Department where the inventory was continued and the cash removed to a secure location. The cash was covered with a white, powdery substance subsequently determined to be cocaine. Because the initial inventory was conducted before daylight, officers inventoried the vehicle again later that morning to verify the existence and location of each item inventoried. During this final inventory officers discovered cocaine in a closed plastic key box located under the driver's seat.

Autran moved to suppress all evidence seized from the vehicle contending the evidence was seized in violation of his Fourth Amendment right and art. I, 9 of the Texas Constitution. The trial judge denied the motion.

Texas Constitution Art. I, 9 provides:
The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions,
from all unreasonable seizures and searches, and no warrant to search any place,
or to seize any person or thing, shall issue without describing them as near as
may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.

What result? See, Jimmy Alfonso Autran v. The State of Texas, 887 S.W.2d 31 (1994).

Submitted by Roy Ben-Yoseph
Emory Law School

Answer

This particular issue, the permissible extent of an inventory search, has resulted in a large amount of litigation in Texas.  In 1994, the Texas Ct. of App. suppressed the evidence in Autran v. Texas, in a factual scenario identical to the above question based on a reading that the Texas Constitution provides greater protection than the United States Constitution. However, in a later case the Court declined to follow Autran and held that the Texas Constitution provides identical protection to the US constitution.    Trujillo v. State 952 S.W.2d 879 (1997).  Under the reasoning of Trujillo, the money and cocaine would be allowed into evidence as the valid products of an inventory search.
 



                                           Next Problem
 
© 2007 Marc L. Miller & Ronald F. Wright