Background
Raleigh police officers arrested Milton Allen for interfering with a criminal investigation. During the arrest, officers placed Allen on the ground, secured his hands and feet, and searched two cross-body bags he was wearing. The search revealed firearms, drugs, and other contraband. Allen moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the search was not incident to arrest because he was already secured. The district court granted the motion, rejecting the government’s inevitable discovery argument.
The court’s reasoning
The court addressed the government’s argument that the evidence would have been inevitably discovered under Raleigh Police Department and Wake County Detention Center inventory policies. The court found that both policies required searches of all personal property for every arrestee entering the facility. The court held that the government was not required to produce written copies of the policies, as officer testimony regarding standard practices was sufficient. The court concluded that the policies provided standardized criteria that limited officer discretion, making the search lawful under the inevitable discovery doctrine regardless of the initial search’s validity.
The evidence with respect to each policy explicitly showed that the policies applied to every arrestee and to all property possessed by the arrestee, without exception.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces the inevitable discovery doctrine for inventory searches and clarifies that oral testimony regarding standard police procedures can satisfy the burden of proving such policies exist.