Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Court confirmed that the purpose of a motor vehicle inventory search was intended to be non-investigatory. In Commonwealth v. White, 469 Mass. 96 (2014), the court defined the scope of these non-investigatory searches and limited their focus to pure inventory of items. As a result, an “inventory search” can no longer be utilized for purposes of a catchall investigative tool.

In the past the Commonwealth was only required to prove that the police conformed to their written inventory policy while conducting an inventory search. If the police did conform to this written policy they were permitted to inventory the contents of the vehicle itself and any closed containers contained therein under the pretense of an inventory search. Any contraband located during these inventory searches was often admissible against the defendant pursuant to an evidentiary loophole – inevitable discovery. Inevitable discovery is evidence which may not have been admissible based upon a constitutional analysis, but becomes admissible because of the logistical need to “protect against lost or stolen items” through an inventory search and the common sense argument that the police would have found it anyway.

White limited the parameters of these inventory searches by clarifying the definition of “non-investigatory.” Specifically, the court considered the purpose of a search to be investigatory if any information taken (and/or recorded) exceeded the detail required to inventory that particular item. By way of example, the Court cited transcribing a bank card number or analysis of a pill to be investigatory in nature. According to the White Court, once an item of contraband has been located through an inventory search, any further analysis or investigation into said item must be done pursuant to a search warrant.

If you are facing criminal charges and need to speak with an attorney, Call Criminal Lawyer Kristen Bonavita at (978) 376-6746 for a free consultation.