California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Benites, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 512, 9 Cal.App.4th 309 (Cal. App. 1992):
Defendant did not challenge the officer's authority to impound the vehicle pursuant to Vehicle Code section 22651, subdivision (p), but this court noted the fact that the statute "gives the officer the discretion to decide whether to impound or to otherwise secure the vehicle does not mean that the procedure is unreasonable in Fourth Amendment terms. The fact that there may be less intrusive means of protecting a vehicle and its contents does not render the decision to impound unreasonable. (Colorado v. Bertine, supra, 479 U.S. at pp. 374-375 [107 S.Ct. at pp. 742-743] )" (People v. Steeley, supra, 210 Cal.App.3d at p. 892, 258 Cal.Rptr. 699.) The officer testified that he was not required to impound and tow a vehicle after citing a driver for driving with a suspended or revoked license, but in making the decision he would consider "whether there was another licensed driver in the vehicle, where the vehicle was located, how many citations had been issued to the driver and whether the driver is the owner of the car." (Ibid.) The officer's decision was not unreasonable because there was no licensed driver present, defendant was not the registered owner, and the vehicle was blocking a driveway.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.