Inventory search in Massachusetts drug case found to be unconstitutional

March 27, 2010
By Michael DelSignore on March 27, 2010 1:19 AM |

The Massachusetts Appeals Court found an inventory search in a drug case to be in violation of the Fourth Amendment and Article 14 of the Massachusetts Constitution. In Commonwealth v. Vanya V, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 379 (2009), decided October 9, 2009, the court ruled that the police improperly searched a locked bag as no exception to the warrant requirement justified the search and the search was not conducted pursuant to an inventory policy to constitute an inventory search. In Vanya V, the officer found a locked bank bag inside a backpack. The officer attempted to gain consent to search the bank bag but it was denied and instead the officer opened the bag by using a knife to tear the stitches of the bag. Drugs and money were found inside the bag.

To conduct a search the police must have a warrant unless an exception to the search warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment and Article 14 apply. One exception is the inventory search exception. The rationale behind the inventory search exception is to protect the property of the person arrested, protect the police from false claims of theft and to protect the public. A valid inventory search must be conducted pursuant to a written policy by the police department.

In the case of Vanya V, the inventory search policy failed to have any policy or procedure that would authorize a police officer to open closed containers in every case. Accordingly, because the inventory policy of the police department did not provide detailed procedures as to how the police were to conduct the inventory search with regard to locked containers as opposed to closed containers, the court suppressed the evidence of narcotics found in the containers and used to support the Massachusetts drug charges against the defendant.

Massachusetts drug and gun charges often involve hearing to suppress evidence based on a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. For a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer, a motion to suppress is a critical part of the defense of drug and gun cases and can result in charges being dismissed.